Response from City of Elk Grove

Response: This recommendation has not yet been implemented but will be partially implemented by June 30,2021. Honorable Russell Hom, Presiding Judge Re: City ofElk Grove 2019-2020 Grand Jury Response August 13,2020 PageT The City and the City currently have three MOUs regarding services to the community: (1) an MOU for the ownership of park and recreational facilities; (2) an MOU for City-owned trail maintenance; and (3) an MOU for recreational special events. In cooperation with the CCSD, the City will assess potential new tax revenue options for the development ofparks and recreational facilities in the City, while properly deferring to the CCSD's role in the development and maintenance of parks and recreational facilities. CONCLUSION Pursuant to the authority provided by resolution ofthe Elk Grove City Council adopted on August 12,2020, the undersigned submits this response on behalf of the Mayor and the City Council of the City of Elk Grove. Thank you for your consideration of this matter. Sincerely, CITY OF EL GROVE Steve Ly, Mayor cc City Council City Manager City Attomey City Clerk Paul Thom, Jury Commissioner (via email) Erendira Tapia-Bouthillier, Grand Jury (via email) EXHIBIT A CCSD LETTER TO HONORABLE RUSSELL HOM, PRESIDING JUDGE COSUMNES COSUMES COMMUNIIY SERVICES DISTRICI ,6t ADMINISTRATIVE SERVICES DEPARTMENI E 8820 Elk Grove Blvd. (CSID EIk Grove. CA 95624 {9r6) 405-s300 Fox {916) 685-6942 www.yourcsd.com August 5, 2020 Honorable Russell Hom, Presiding Judge Sacramento County Superior Court 720 9th Street, Dept.47 Sacramento, CA 95624 RE: Cosumnes Community Services District 2019-2020 Grand Jury Response Dear Judge Hom; The Cosumnes Community Services District ("CCSD") is pleased to provide the following response to the recommendations from the 2019-2020 Sacramento County Grand Jury Final Report entitled "Elk Grove Parks: Where Have AII the Flowers Gone?" As stipulated in the 2019-2020 Sacramento County Grand Jury Final Report and Penal Code Sections 933 and 933.05, the Board of Directors ("Board") of the District submits the following responses to the Grand Jury's findings and recommendations: FINDINGS Findinq Fl: The current muItiple funding mechanisms are neither effective nor sustainable for managing Elk Grove's parks Response: The CCSD partially agrees with this finding. The CCSD agrees that the Landscape & Lighting (L&L) assessment fees are not a sustainable funding source to continue the current level of landscape maintenance or capital replacement needs. ln order to sustain the required maintenance and capital replacemenl needs of the gg+ parks in Elk Grove, a new assessment will be required. The CCSD disagrees with the finding that L&L fees are not effective. The L&L assessment mechanism allows the community to decide the amount of funding available for parks; therefore, it is effectively working as the legislature intended. Findinq F2: Public confusion and misunderstandi ng are evidenced by the need for extensive and repeated community outreach meetings and the mixed success in securing timely voter approval for needed revenue increases. Contributing to this confusion are: the division in roles for Elk Grove's parks between the City of Elk Grove and Cosumnes Community Services District Enrlchlng Communlty SoYlng Llves cosumnes Community seryices District, 20192020 Grand Jury Response, Community Services District (CCSD); priorities among neighborhood and district-wide facilities; and the challenge of managing and understanding the park system as an integrated program. Response: The CCSD partially agrees with this finding. The CCSD agrees that a new L&L assessment requires extensive and regular community outreach meetings to be considered successful. lt is important to note the CCSD hosts multiple public outreach meetings with property owners in various locations of the District throughout the year, works with neighborhood "champions" that help engage and education property owners, and has full-time staff and a hotline available to answer community questions regarding parks, including L&L fees. The District prepares an annual report on each Zone to illustrate the revenues and expenditures for the fiscal year. The CCSD disagrees with the finding that the different roles of the City of Elk Grove ("City") and the CCSD have created confusion on managing and understanding the parks system as an integrated program. The City and the CCSD have a great partnership and have created a robust parks system that is a model in the region. Findinq F3: The 19 different Landscape and Lighting (L&L) diskict assessment rates, varying by as much as a factor of four, cause significant inequities for Elk Grove residents in terms of payments they make and benefits they derive from Elk Grove parks. Response: The CCSD partially agrees with this finding. The CCSD agrees that the L&L assessments vary between benefit zones. The CCSD disagrees that the difference of assessment rates creates inequity. Each benefit zone's annual assessment is based on the amenities within the zone when the assessment was adopted, and the level of current maintenance standards that can be afforded with the annual assessmenl. ln accordance with the Landscape and Lighting Disklct Law (Streets and Highways Code Section 22500 ef seg.), an engineer's report is prepared for each L&L benelit zone setting forth the estimated benefits to each lot or parcel within that benefit zone. By law, the District cannot assess the same L&L fee to every parcel because each parcel's fee is based on that specific parcel's estimated benefits. The parks in the entire City are available to all residents and non-residents equally. Findino F4: The practice of contributing revenue from individual benefit zones to distric! wide facilities as a priority ahead of funding parks within each beneftt zone compounds the revenue shortages experienced by certain benefit zones. Response: The CCSD partially agrees with this finding. The CCSD agrees that revenue shortages within each individual benefit zone may create a challenge to maintain or replace the amenities in the park system. Community Servlces Dislricl Enrlchlng Communlty Sovlng Llves Cosumnes Community Seruices Disttict, 2019-2020 Gnnd Jury Response, The CCSD disagrees that the contribution to district-wide will result in revenue shortages in certain benefit zones. The contribution to district-wide facilities provides an opportunity to ensure districlwide facilities are maintained at a level that will provide all residents the ability to utilize the amenities that may not be available in their neighborhood. Findinq F5: The requirement in Proposition 218 to secure a public vote in order to increase funding in excess of a Consumer Price lndex (CPl) index is an unwieldy restraint that impedes adequate funding to maintain, repair and restore Elk Grove parks. Response: The CCSD agrees with this finding. Findinq F6: The existing L&L assessment rates are insufficient to sustain maintenance, repair, and restoration for parks indefinitely. Specifically, in the short term, revenue from L&L assessment rates in BZ3 and BZ4 is insufficient to maintain, repair, and restore all parks in those benefil zones. Response: The CCSD agrees with this finding. Findinq F7: The emphasis on individual benefit zones and overlay districts creates a complex and costly administrative burden requiring fragmented budgeting and management, and voter approvals to generate adequate revenue. Response: The CCSD agrees with this finding. The CCSD agrees the emphasis on funding on individual benefit zone creates complex and costly administrative burden; therefore, the District has explored options to place a districlwide tax measure that will help mitigate the cost increases or provide funding for rehabilitation and replacement of the current infrastructure. Findinq F8: The baseline budget for park maintenance, repair and restoration does not take into account, nor is it adequate to fund future park modifications or maintenance associated with new parks and programs. Response: The CCSD partially agrees with this finding. The CCSD agrees that L&L funding is not intended to directly support recreational prog rams. The CCSD disagrees that all park maintenance is not adequate to fund park modifications or maintenance. The CCSD approves a budget at a level which protects the longterm sustainability of each benefrt zone fund. As such manyof the benefits zones were created with long term asset replacement in mind. This accounts for the higher assessment rates. The CCSD's Capital lmprovement Plan ("ClP") is in place to ensure a level of rehabilitation and replacement is conducted based on the asset condition and available funding. Findinq F9: CCSD's practice of attempting to increase voter understanding and acceptance of financial responsibility for the parks program through various outreach Community Services District Enrlchlng Communlty Sovlng Llves Cosumnes Commu nity Selices District, 2019-2020 Grand Jury Response, efforts has had uneven results in terms of gaining greater voter participation and potentially influencing additional funding for this program. Response: The CCSD agrees with this finding. Findinq F10: The City of Elk Grove and CCSD have not collaborated effectively to reform and restructure the system. Response: The CCSD disagrees wlth this finding. Oversite and implementation of the Landscape & Lighting assessment districts are the responsibility of the CCSD. The City has been an active partner in addressing future park needs in the Laguna Ridge and South East Planning Area through the use of a City administered Community Facilities District ("CFD"), but the reform and restructure of the L&L assessment funding is not the responsibility of the City.