HomeMy WebLinkAbout4.07 EBRPD Park/Open Space Bond Measure CITY OF DUBLIN
AGENDA STATEMENT
CITY COUNCIL MEETING DATE: August 8, 1988
SUBJECT East Bay Regional Park District Proposed
Park and Open Space Bond
EXHIBITS ATTACHED A. Correspondence from East Bay
Regional Park District
RECOMMENDATION j!���.. Information i
FINANCIAL STATEMENT : Preliminary Estimates of funds to Dublin
- $639 ,303
DESCRIPTION The Board of Directors of the East Bay
Regional Park District has approved placement of a $225 million
general obligation bond on the November 8 , 1988 ballot.
The proceeds from the bond will be used to finance aquisition and
development of regional and local parkland and open space.
The allocation of funds from the bond is as follows:
East Bay Regional Park District:
Aquisition of regional parklands and open space - $126 .5
million
Development and improvement of regional parkland - $42.2
million
Alameda and Contra Costa Cities, Special Districts and
County Service Areas :
Aquisition and development of local parkland and open
space - $56 .2 million
Prior to approval of the bond, the East Bay Regional Park
District Board of Directors retained bond counsel, a financial
advisor and other specialists to work out the details of the
proposed bond issue in terms of its feasibility, the total amount
of bonds issued, and the formula for the funding allocation to
the District and other public agencies. The Board selected the
$225 million bond level after review of the polling information
contained within the Survey Research Institute Study, which
indicated a strong willingness on the part of the District voters
to pay additional taxes to purchase and preserve open space.
A summary of the survey responses is contained in the
correspondence received from Mary Lee Jefferds , President, Board
of Directors, East Bay Regional Park District (Exhibit A) .
The $225 million bond level will also allow the District to stay
under the 1 cent tax increase per $100 assessed valuation or $10
per average household/parcel per year benchmark identified in the
poll .
It is estimated that Dublins allocation would be $639,303 should
the bond be approved by the voters on November 8 , 1988. As there
is $1 ,226 , 560 in unfunded park projects in the 1988-1993 Capital
Improvement Program, these funds could be used to offset this
deficit.
It is staffs understanding that the East Bay Regional Park
District will be providing the Council and staff with further
information on the proposed 1988 Regional Open Space and Park
Bond in upcoming weeks.
-----------------------------------------------------------------
ITEhi NO. 11 Copies to: East Bay Regional Park District
EXHIBIT A
BOARD OF DIRECTORS
East B a y MARY LEE JEFFERDS,President
(� JAMES H.DUNCAN,Vw Presdent
JOHN O'DONNELL Seaetery
Regional Park District HARLAN COMBS
KAY G District/t/'Il JOCELVN COMBS
KAY PETERSEN
TED RADKE
11500 SKYLINE BOULEVARD,OAKLAND,CA 94619-2443 TELEPHONE(415)531-9300
July 22, 1988
RECEIVED
Honorable Linda Jeffery JUL 25 1988
Mayor
City of Dublin nURl IN
City Hall
P.O. Box 2340
Dublin, CA 94568
Dear Mayor Jeffery:
The Board of Directors of the East Bay Regional Park District on
July 19 voted unanimously to place a $225 million (Exhibit 1)
general obligation bond on the November 8 ballot. The Board also
determined the allocation of funds from the proposed bond as
follows (Exhibit 2) : $126.5 million for acquisition of regional
parklands and open space, $56. 2 million for use by local agencies
for acquisition and development of local parkland and open space,
$42 .2 million for development and improvement of regional
parkland.
The Board selected the $225 million bond level after review of
the polling information contained within the Survey Research
Institute Study (summary enclosed) which indicated a strong
willingness on the part of District voters to pay additional
taxes to purchase and preserve open space. The $225 million bond
level will also allow us to stay under the 1 cent tax increase
per $100 assessed valuation or $10 per average household/parcel
per year benchmark identified in the .poll.
On August 2 the Board has scheduled three items: the District's
list of park and open space projects; approval of the ordinance
ordering the bond to be placed before the voters; and adoption of
a resolution covering details for placing the measure on the
ballot.
The Proposed Park and Open Space Bond will provide allocations to
cities, local special districts and county service areas '
totalling $56, 250, 000 (outlined in Exhibit 3) . As you can see
the direct allocations for your agency are significantly higher
than the local funds provided through Proposition 70. In view of
the immediate needs of the cities the District plans to allocate
the city portion of the proposed bond during the first and second
45 million dollar bond issues contemplated for 1989 and 1992 .
July 22, 1988 - page two
The list of potential projects submitted by your agency included
a number of important parkland and recreation projects that will
benefit your community. We suggest that you select the final
projects that would most appropriately be funded by the bond,
forwarding your final recommendations to the Park District and to
the Campaign Committee which will be established after August 2 .
The District plans to use grant administration procedures which
are patterned after the State's Proposition 43 and 70 guidelines.
We plan to provide your park and recreation Director with a
draft copy of these procedures in the next two weeks.
Recent population forecasts anticipate growth approaching 450, 000
new residents in Alameda and Contra Costa counties. An increase
of this magnitude will surely lead to competition for purchase of
remaining open space and park quality land as well as to
increased public demand for park facilities.
The Regional Park portion of the bond will be used to implement
the District's newly adopted 1988 Master Plan for regional parks
in Alameda and Contra Costa counties. The plan recognizes that
the Bay Area is a growing region, and that new and expanded open
space areas and parks must be provided to maintain the quality of
life for our residents. Thus, a major component of the
District' s 1988 Master Plan is the early completion of existing
parks, creation of a few new parks and the completion of the
regional trails plan.
Following the August 2 Board meeting we will provide you and your
council with the specific list of District projects which would
be funded by the regional portion of the proposed bond. We look
forward to working with your agency in finishing the project
component of the Proposed Park and Open Space Bond. Our Board
and staff are also available to answer questions and provide
further information.
Sincerely,
Mary Lee Jeffe'rds
President, -Board of Directors
MLJ/JDK:df
Enclosures
Exhibit 1
EAST BAY REGIONAL PARK DISTRICT
RESOLUTION No. 1988-7- 261
i July 19, 1988
DETERMINATION THAT THE PUBLIC INTEREST AND NECESSITY DEMAND
COMPLETION OF THE EAST BAY REGIONAL PARK DISTRICT MASTER PLAN FOR
ACQUISITION AND DEVELOPMENT OF REGIONAL PARKLANDS AND OPEN SPACE
AND ACQUISITION AND DEVELOPMENT OF LOCAL PARKLANDS WITH FINANCING
THROUGH THE ISSUANCE OF GENERAL OBLIGATION BONDS
RESOLVED, by the Board of Directors of the East Bay Regional
Park District, California, that
WHEREAS , Section 5568 of the Public Resources Code of the
State of California authorizes districts to issue general
obligation bonds to finance regional and local park, recreational
and open space land and improvements upon full compliance with
the provisions of Article 1, commencing with Section 43600, of
Chapter 4 of Division 4 of Title 4 of the Government Code of the
State of California (the "Act") ;
WHEREAS, the East Bay Regional Park District (the
. "District") intends to issue general obligation bonds under and
pursuant to the Act to complete the"East Bay Regional Park
District Master Plan for parklands -and open space and acquisition
and development of local parklands with financing through the
issuance of general obligation bonds; and
WHEREAS, in order to initiate proceedings under the Act to
provide for the financing of the Park Program, this Board must
make certain findings and determinations.
NOWT THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED that:
1. The public interest and necessity demands, and it is
the intention of this Board to complete the East Bay Regional
Park District Master Plan for parklands and open space and to
assist cities within the District with their funding of
acquisition and development of local. parklands with financing
through the issuance of general obligation bonds (the "Park
Program") , subject to completion of the proceedings required by
the Act.
2 . The estimated cost of the Park Program is not to exceed
$225,000.000.00 Said estimated costs include provision for
legal and other fees, and the cost of printing of bonds and other
costs and expenses incidental to or connected with the issuance
and sale of general obligation bonds to. finance the costs of the
Park Program.
!;,iroLtask1. Secretary to the Board of Directors
�'• •h..+icai iJuy kagional Park District.do herebv cortify
thol Oho.shove and foregoing i_o suit .ru¢,and correct copy
ot i("oialion 1988-7-261 adopted by the Board of Directors
at�a regular meeting held on JulyA 19, 1988/.,
. . l_i .LCl-L'J✓I�P.J 7v. f! l4Ya-.t�C71nIC_l,' , -. ...._ . ..._._
3 . This. .Board hereby finds and determines that the costs
of the Park Program require an expenditure by the District
greater than the amount allowed for it by the annual tax levy of
the District. The principal 'amount of general obligation bonds
of the District to be issued for the Park Program will not exceed
the estimated cost set forth above for the Park Program.
4 . This Resolution is adopted, and general obligation
bonds of the District are to be issued, pursuant to Section 5568
of the Public Resources Code of the State of Californai and the
Act referred to therein.
5. This Resolution shall take effect upon its adoption by
two-thirds of all members of the Board of Directors of the East
Bay Regional Park District.
Moved by Director Jocelyn Combs , seconded by
Director Ted Radke . . , and adopted this 19th day of July,
1988, by the following vote:
FOR: Directors Jocelyn Combs, James Duncan, Wary
Lee Jefferds, Harlan Kessel, John O'Donnell,
Kay Petersen, Ted Radke
AGAINST: None
ABSENT: None jA
ABSTAIN: None
Exhibit 2
EAST BAY REGIONAL PARK DISTRICT
RESOLUTION NO. 1988-7-262
July 19, 1988
RESOLUTION CONCERNING ALLOCATION OF PROCEEDS OF THE PROPOSED
1988 GENERAL OBLIGATION BOND AMONG REGIONAL AND LOCAL PURPOSES
AND AMONG ACQUISITION AND IMPROVEMENT PURPOSES
WHEREAS, the Board of Directors of the East Bay Regional
Park District (the "District") has evaluated the allocation of
the net proceeds (the "Proceeds") of the proposed 1988 General
Obligation Bond measure among regional and local purposes, and
acquisition and improvement purposes; and
WHEREAS, as part of this evaluation, the Board of Directors
has conducted a public opinion poll identifying the preferences
of the voters of the District on this allocation of the Proceeds;
NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED AS FOLLOWS:
Section 1. That the Proceeds shall be allocated among
regional and local purposes, and acquisition and improvement
purposes, as follows:
(a) ' Seventy-five percent (75%) of the Proceeds shall
be allocated to the District for regional park purposes and
twenty-five percent (25%) of the Proceeds shall be contributed to
cities and other public corporations, districts, agencies or
entities ("Participating Entities") for local park purposes; the
formula for allocation to Participating Entities will be based on
Proposition 43 ; and
(b) Of the seventy-five percent (75%) of the Proceeds
allocated to the District for regional park purposes, seventy-
five percent of that allocation shall be for the purpose of the
acquisition of open space and regional parklands and twenty-five
percent (25%) of that allocation shall be for the purpose of
development of regional parklands within the District.
CERTIFICATION
i, Debra i. Wroblo—Ai. Secretary to the Board of Directors
of +hu Iasi bo,• togionol Purl;Districl, do hareby certify
rhui lhr:above and fore.oing is.a full. true and corroct copy
of Resolution 1988-7-262 cdaptod by the Board of Directors
at a regular meeting hold on July 19, 1988
Section 2 . That the above allocations shall be set forth 'in
the Ordinance for the 1988 General Obligation measure which will
be considered by the Board of Directors !.at its regular meeting on
August 2, 1988 .
Moved by Director Jocelyn Combs , seconded by Director
Ted Radke and approved this 19th day of July, 1988, by
the following vote:
FOR: Directors Jocelyn. Combs, James Duncan, Mary. Lee Jefferds,
Harlan Kessel, John O'Donnell, Kay Petersen, Ted Radke
AGAINST: None
ABSTAIN: None
ABSENT: None
• � i
Exhibit 3
y 1-jd8 RE610HAL OPEN SPACE AND PARK BOND
R.ELIMIN-ARY-ESTIMgrEg-d):-PURt)g-TO CITIES, SPECIAL bISTRIC_TS, AND
COUNTY SERVICE AREAS
JULY 20 1988
1 Pr OPULATION i ESTIMATED SHARE•
ALAMEDA COUNTY
Alameda i` 75,9001 $2,200.595 !
Albany ( 15,900! $460,994
Berkeley 106,8001 $3,096,490 ;
Dublin I I 22,050! $639,3031
Emeryville I 1 4,930; $142,937
Fremont i 165.2001 $4,769,702 j
, -
ivewark i 39.400! $1,142.338 I
Oakland ! ! 357,8001 $10,373,821
Piedmont 1 10,4501 $302,981
Pleasanton i j 48,5001 $1,406,178
San Leandro 67,3411 $1,945,454
Union City .5o,1001 $1,452,5671
HARD _ ; ! 214,7531 Sb,226,409
Remainder ( r- 7,7177 $223,74/2 i
Subtotal; 1,186,6001 $34,403,510
It '
1 1 i I
CONTRA COSTA COUNTY i
Antioch ' 1 54,2001 $1,571,440
°r?ntwood ! 6,4001: $185,557 !
Clayton ! ; _ 6,7251 $194,980 I
Concord ! i 108,9001 $3,1.57,376
Danville 1 1. 28,9001 $837,9081
El Cerrito 23.1501 $671,1961
Hercules 12,6001 $365,3161
Lafayette i 22,5501 $653,8001
Orinda _ 17,350' $503,035
Martinez ! 29,8501 $865,4521
Moraga ! I 15,8501 $459,545 i
Pinole j 15,2501 $442,149
Pittsburg 43,0001. $1,246,714
Richmond 81,5001 $2,362,9581,
San Pablo 21,450i $621,907 '
San Ramon i 30,4001 $681,398 I
Walnut Creek ' I 62,5001 $1,812.0841
Pleasant Hill(Dist.) 33,0001 $956.781 1
Ambrose(Dist.)! I 22,000 $637,954
Discovery 53y 4,200 $121,772
Oakley I 12,4001 $359,518
Clyde 4501 $13,047 j
Crockett. --3-.2501 $94.226 i
Alamo 13,0181 $377,435 i.
Rodeo 8,400 $243,544 .
Montarabay 10,000 $289,934 1
El Sobrant.e 12.257 $355,372
Remainder 53,950. $1,564,191 �
Subtotal 1 753,500 $21,846,490 !
Total Population' 1,940,100 j
To Cities,Special Districts,and Service Areasl $56,250,000
* Bond administration costs estimated at 1.5% will be deducted
from each agency's allocation.
East Bay Regional Park District
SURVEY RESEARCH
I N S T I T U T E
STUDY TO DETERMINE THE FEASIBILITY FOR APPROVAL OF A
$200-$400 MILLION BOND MEASURE IN NOVEMBER '88 ELECTION
Conducted by Survey Research Institute
George G. Manross, Ph.D.
Michael D. Cozzens, Ph.D.
Ana Marie del Rio, MPA
Mary Ann Manross, MA
July 1988
1' o , t Office Ic, - 4 La favette , CA 9 4 _ 49 415 372 - 3 - z
EXECUTIVE SUMMARY
The findings of a just-completed survey of registered voters
throughout the East Bay Regional Park District (EBRPD), commissioned by
the district's Board of Directors and conducted by the Survey Research
Institute of Lafayette, California, have led to the following
recommendations:
1. EBRPD's Board of Directors should arrange to place a general
obligation bond on the November 1988 ballot in the amount of $225
million. This is based upon the finding that 80% of the
respondents (well over the necessary 2/3 majority) said they would
be willing to support a general obligation bond to protect open
spaces throughout the East Bay Regional Park District, assuming
that the cost to them in increased taxes remained around $5 per
year over the 25-year life of the bond. However, the data also
show that, given a carefully designed information campaign, that
threshold could be raised as high as $10. According to EBRPD's
financial advisor, a $115 million bond issue could be paid off at
a maximum annual cost to the taxpayer of $5 per $100,000 assessed
property valuation. A $225 million bond issue would have a
maximum annual cost of $10 per $100,000 assessed property
valuation.
2. A PUBLIC INFORMATION CAMPAIGN should be carefully designed
and implemented in a timely fashion in which the primary focus.
remains upon the "protection" of open spaces and wildlife through
land acquisition in Alameda and Contra Costa Counties, as opposed
to the development of additional parks and recreational
facilities.
3. The bond measure should either be limited to EBRPD needs and
projects; or, if the district's Directors wish to include projects
involving the maintenance and development of parks and
recreational facilities under the jurisdiction of the
incorporated municipalities located within the geographic
boundaries of the EBRPD district, then the shared funding be
limited to a ratio of 80-20 (80% for EBRPD projects and 20% shared
amono, the respective municipalities) .
The above three recommendations are based upon the findings that:
(1) 71% of the respondents in the survey specifically said they would
vote for an EBRPD bond measure in November (sae question six in the
survey) , while 22% said they would not and 7% declined to answer the
question; (2) 68% of the respondents either agreed or
Page 1
Figure 2
EAST BAY REGIONAL PARK DISTRICT
JULY 1988
Outcome of a Bond Measure if Voted on Today
Refused
to Respond
7%/o
No
22 0
/o
e
Survey Research Institute
Figure 4
EAST BAY REGIONAL PARK DISTRICT
JULY 1988
Priorities for Usage
(Question 4)
44
34
22
Recreational Buy Property Balance
Facilities to Protect Between Both
Open Spaces
Survey Research Institute
Eas,. Bay Regional Park District
SURVEY RESULTS
1. Are there any local issues you are concerned about today? YES NO
559 45%
1.1 If yes, what are they?
2. I will now read a list of local issues. Please tell me, in order of
priority, which three of these issues are of most concern to you. (Indicate
1st, 2nd, 3rd)
23% roads
249 housing
469 drug abuse
289 need for protecting open space
359 traffic
119 jobs
119 public transportation
79 need for more or better recreation facilities
429 schools
129 growth
409 crime
3. Do you or any members of your family use public parks and recreational
facilities such as trails, lake swimming, and picnic areas? YES NO
809 209
3.1 If YES, what facilities do you regularly use?
3.2 If NO, why not?
4. As you probably know, the East Bay Regional Park District is responsible for
creating and maintaining most of the regional parks, recreation areas, and
wilderness areas in Alameda and Contra Costa Counties.
It's responsibilities fall into two distinct categories: 1) providing
adequate regional parks and recreational facilities for local residents and
visitors; and 2) protecting open spaces by purchasing shoreline and
ridgeline properties '_n order to protect and er.`,ance the quality of life
within the district.
Like all public agencies, the park district relies upon tax dollars to carry
out its responsibilities. Therefore, it must function on limited funding.
Given its limited resourcess, which of the two areas of responsibilities do
you think should be given top priority: a) providing recreational
facilities, or b) buying properties to protect our open spaces?
229 providing recreational facilities
44% buying property to protect open spaces
349 balance between both
5. Using a 5-point scale, with '1' being "I strongly disagree" and 'S' being "I
strongly.agree", how do you feel about the following statements:
1 - I strongly disagree
2 = I disagree
3 = I neither agree nor disagree
4 = I agree
5 = I strongly agree
1 2 3 4 5
5.1 We don't have much open space left in Alameda and
Contra Costa Counties and we must protect what is 49 67 227 257 437
left at all costs.
5.2 The East Bay area needs more parks and recreational
facilities for public use. 57 157 277 277 267
5.3 The East Bay Regional Park District already has
enough property and public monies should be used
to develop parks and recreational facilities on 157 247 247 207 177
this property before spending more money on buying
additional land.
5.4 The East Bay Regional Park District is doing a good
job of operating and maintaining regional parks 37 57 257 407 277
and recreation facilities.
5.5 Protecting local wildlife and their natural
habitat should be a high priority item for the 17 67 137 257 557
East Bay Regional Park District.
5.4 Taxes are already too high, I would never vote for
a tax increase of any kind. 267 227 237 147 157
6. The Board of Directors of the East Bay Regional Park District are
considering putting a bond measure on the November ballot in order to
provide for necessary monies for land acquisition and for developing
additional parks and recreational facilities.
If such a bond measure were to appear on the November ballot for these
purposes, would you be likely to vote for it? YES NO
71% 227
7. Thinking in terms of increasing our property taxes to pay for PROTECTING
OPEN SPACES here in Alameda and Contra Costa Counties, what seems to be a
reasonable amount of additional taxes you would be willing to pay?
20% nothing
197 up to $5 per year
217 up to $10 per year
207 up to $20 per year
207 more than $20 per year
8. Thinking in terms of in._ :asing our property taxes to pa, _or PROVIDING
ADDITIONAL PARKS AND RECREATIONAL FACILITIES here in Alameda and Contra
Costa Counties, what seems to be a reasonable amount of additional taxes
you would be willing to pay?
26% nothing
242 up to $5 per year
207 up to $10 per year
15% up to $20 per year
157 more than $20 per year
9. 'I will read a series of alternative projects that the monies generated
through tax revenues would make possible. After I read each one, would you
tell me whether it would make you MORE or LESS likely to support a bond
measure in the November election?
MORE LESS Neither
9.1 If the majority of funds would be used to purchase and
protect local hills, ridgelines, and shorelines? 727 17% 117
9.2 If the majority of funds would be used to develop new
parks and recreational facilities? 507 347 167
9.3 If the majority of funds would be used to upgrade the
parks and recreational facilities on properties the 647 237 137
district already owns and operates?
9.4 If the bond measure were publically supported by the
Sierra Club, Audobon Society, and other environmental 517 187 317
protection groups?
9.5 If the bond measure were publically supported. by local
elected officials, such as your city council or county 387 257 377
supervisors?
9.6 If the bond measure were publically supported by pro-
development group such as local builders and business? 267 527 227
10. Not all parks and recreational facilities in Alameda and Contra Costa
Counties are within the jurisdiction of the East Bay Regional Park
District. For example, virtually every incorporated city provides such
facilities as public swimming pools, baseball and soccer fields, tennis
courts, and some (such as the City of Oakland) even provides a zoo.
These government agencies also depend upon tax dollars for purchasing the
properties, as well as building and maintaining their parks and
recreational facilities. As a result, many of these government entities
may decides to place a tax measure of their own on the November ballot in
an effort to secure funding. This means that you could find yourself being
asked to vote for two separate bond measures, both designed to provide for
additional parks and recreational facilities.
Would you be more likely to support a bond measure for additional parks and
recreational facilities if a way could be found to pool the needs of the
cities with the needs of the East Bay Regional Park District and then share
the tax revenues according to reed; or would you prefer to keep these bond
measure separate, thus having an opportunity to vote for or against each
one?
307 one bond measure
619, separate bond measures
97 neither
11. The Oakland Zoo is the only zoo located in the East Bay. Many people are
aware of the fact that the Oakland Zoo is experiencing financial problems
and may have to be closed. If some portion of the revenues from a park
district's bond measure were earmarked for keeping the Oakland Zoo open,
how likely would you be to support the bond measure?
Not at all Somewhat No Very
likely likely Difference Likely likely
169 87 127 247 407
12. Using traditional political labels, how would you describe yourself as a
liberal, moderate, conservative?
237 liberal
479 moderate
307 conservative
13. How old were you on your last birthday?
179 18-25 years 117 56-65 years
347 26-40 years 97 over 65 years
297 41-55 years
14. What was the last grade of school you completed?
47 less than high school 197 college graduate
247 high school graduate 177 post graduate
367 some college other
15. Do you own or rent your home? OWN RENT
667 347
16. Which of the following ranges represents your
annual household income?
97 Under $12,000 257 $40,001-60,000
167 $12,001-25,000 127 $60,001-75,000
237 $25,001-40,000 157 Over $75,000
17. Sex MALE FEMALE
467 547
18. Party DEM REP Other
567 337 11%