📋
Extraído del Informe Consolidado

Esta investigación fue publicada originalmente como parte de un informe consolidado más amplio que contiene múltiples investigaciones. Consulte el PDF consolidado para ver el documento completo.

Fresno County Grand Jury • 2004-2005

• Will have 240 beds for juveniles waiting for their day in court

6 pages
View PDF View Full Original

Findings 28 findings

F1 Page 59
California State laws empower cities to form these districts
F2 Page 59
These districts are located throughout the city, totaling 160.8 acres of common landscaping
F3 Page 59
The homeowners in these districts pay a special yearly maintenance fee that is included in the County property tax statement
F4 Page 59
Most homes and businesses in the city are not located in the districts B. Landscaping, Lighting and Maintenance District 1 (LLMD#1):
F5 Page 59
Was implemented in 1983 and stopped adding new tracts in 1997
F6 Page 59
Consists of 145 tracts, totaling 78.8 acres of common landscaping
F7 Page 59
Is an assessment district in which the fee is fixed at 19 cents per square foot of common landscaping
F8 Page 59
Has no practical means for increasing the fee as maintenance costs rise C. Community Facilities District 2 (CFD#2):
F9 Page 59
Implemented in 1997, consists of 131 tracts, totaling 82.0 acres of common landscaping 41
F10 Page 60
A tax district initiated by Proposition 218 that has a current annual fee of 22.4 cents per square foot
F11 Page 60
This fee can be adjusted by and annual escalator clause
F12 Page 60
The City Council approves annexation of new tracts to this district D. The City Parks and Recreation Department was responsible for maintaining the landscape districts until August 2, 2004:
F13 Page 60
Retained the monies collected from LLMD#1 and CFD#2 in separate accounts
F14 Page 60
Did not track money spent for specific housing tracts
F15 Page 60
Claimed maintenance was performed “once a month,” but, in reality, it was done “once every ninety days” or longer
F16 Page 60
Poor quality of maintenance in LLMD#1 led to numerous homeowner complaints about improper watering and failure to remove and replace dead trees and shrubs
F17 Page 60
Twenty-three maintenance workers were to be available every week; vacancies often reduced this number to as few as eighteen
F18 Page 60
Tree Fresno, and sometimes jail inmates, provided additional labor until one year ago
F19 Page 60
Additionally, maintenance workers were required to maintain all median islands with various buffer zones, bicycle paths, and temporary ponding basins E. The City Council approved transfer of the maintenance districts to Public Works Department on August 2, 2004. Given these new responsibilities, the Public Works Department has:
F20 Page 60
Established special accounts for each tract with all costs specifically documented
F21 Page 60
Required workers to document work performed and hours worked
F22 Page 60
Planned to have a detailed audit of each tract performed and provide a projection of future costs
F23 Page 60
Included the transfer of the Parks and Recreation maintenance crew
F24 Page 60
Contracted for four crews from the local Conservation Corps 42 F. According to a report to City Council by the interim directors of Parks and Recreation Department and the Public Works Department on September 11, 2004:
F25 Page 61
The lack of an escalator clause in the LLMD#1 has resulted in annual revenues approximately $100,000 less than the cost of providing services
F26 Page 61
A special election complying with Proposition 218, requiring a two-thirds majority of favorable ballots is necessary to increase the annual assessment in LLMD#1
F27 Page 61
The ballot should include a provision for an automatic escalator similar to CFD#2
F28 Page 61
The cost to conduct the election is estimated at $60,000, and requires holding special hearings and mailing ballots to 14,900 property owners by certified mail G. According to legal and political opinions, landscape setbacks of the tracts in LLMD#1 are public right-of-ways and the increased maintenance costs could be included as a budget item and paid out of City’s General Fund. CONCLUSIONS A. The City of Fresno has two landscaping and lighting maintenance districts; an assessment district, LLMD#1, with no practical provisions for increasing fees; and a tax district, CFD#2, with the ability to raise taxes to meet rising maintenance costs. B. Rising labor and supply costs, coupled with poor management and cost accounting by Parks and Recreation Department resulted in many years of deteriorating maintenance. The City has defaulted in its responsibility to maintain the districts. C. In response to poor maintenance, the City Council approved transfer of the management of LLMD#1 and CFD#2 districts to the Public Works Department on August 2, 2004. D. The Public Works Department has reorganized accounting functions to analyze actual expenses incurred in each housing tract in the districts and correlate this information with revenues received. With this audit, the Public Works Department will be able to provide a detailed cost projection. E. CFD#2 costs are subject to increase. The fixed assessment in LLMD#1 will have to be supplemented either by a special election or monies from the General Fund.

Recommendations 4