Tonight marks the final meeting of the Claremont City Council prior to their annual August recess. The council will have another busy night ahead of them, beginning with a special session at 5:15pm to discuss Capital Improvement Program budget priorities.
At 6:30pm, the council moves on to its regular meeting.
Issues on tap at tonight's City Council meeting include:
- Budget Talk: As indicated, the Capital Improvement Program (CIP) budget is a big topic, especially in light of the city having to implement an across-the-board cutback in spending in order to balance its books. With the state facing a $15.5 billion or more budget deficit and with Governor Schwartzenegger floating the idea of withholding Prop. 1A transportation bond money from municipalities, Claremont could be hurting if it doesn't manage its finances prudently.
The city has $4,189,396 in capital improvements budgeted for Fiscal Year 2008-09. For FY 2009-10 they've allocated $3,491,000.
One thing we noticed in the staff report for the CIP budget review is the amount of money the city has set aside from their gas tax fund: $216,351 in FY 2008-09 and a whopping $1,217,000 in FY 2009-10, or more than a third of the CIP budget for that period.
If you read yesterday's LA Times, you might have seen the front-page article about how federally-funded highway and infrastructure projects are endanger because the feds are collecting less gasoline tax money as result of people driving less. According to the Times, gas consumption is projected to decline this year, which means less tax revenue on the state level as well.
The less money the city gets from gas tax revenues, the more it has to come up with from other sources for things like road resurfacing, sidewalk in-fill, and street light projects. With gas prices expected to rise in the long-term get ready for less gas tax money, Claremont. - Affordable Housing: Yes, this one has come back, mostly because Claremont Mayor Ellen Taylor wants this as an accomplishment to point to for her re-election campaign next March.
There are two agenda items for this issue. The first is the purchase of a new affordable housing parcel. Will Bigham at the Daily Bulletin reported yesterday that the Claremont City Council is going to consider purchasing the old Claremont Courier site at 111 S. College Ave. [NOTE: This item was no longer available last time we checked, a victim of the vagaries of the Bulletin's breaking news policy.]
Bigham said the purchase price for the 3.3-acre parcel is $3.5 million. 2.4 acres are owned by G. E. McKay & Co. The remaining .9 acres (listed as a "9-acre property" in the staff report, but what's an order of magnitude between friends?) is owned by Golden State Water Co. The city says it can buy the 2.4 acres for $2,750,000 and the .9 acres (or 9 acres) for $800,000, which adds up to $3,550,000.
Bigham wrote that the City will use one million dollars from an affordable housing reserve fund and wants to finance the remainder through a bond taken out by the Claremont Revelopment Agency, otherwise known as the Claremont City Council.
The second affordable housing item is the report from the city's Affordable Housing Task Force. The city will review the task force's recommendations. - Appeal of Architectural Commission Decision: The council will hear an appeal by of the Architectural Commission's decision to grant a Mitigated Negative Declaration for Claremont McKenna College's planned 162,000 square-foot Kravis Center. The center will house administrative and academic offices. The appeal has been made by resident Alfonso Villanueva.
- Criminal Background Checks: The door-to-door solicitation ordinance that got the Girl Scouts all riled up okayed the use of criminal background checks for commercial solicitors (you Girl Scouts and your parents don't have to worry about that one - your secrets are safe!).
The city now wants the City Council to allow Assistant City Manager Tony Ramos to conduct criminal background checks to screen potential employees and volunteers. Here's the staff report, by none other than Claremont Police Chief Paul Cooper. - City Investment Accounts Report: The staff report for the City's investment accounts show a relatively conservative portfolio, a legacy of Claremont's investment in the Orange County Investment Pool (OCIP) back in the early 1990's. Recall that when the OCIP went bankrupt, over $5 million in Claremont funds were tied up for years while the City litigated the matter. We eventually recovered our investment but lost out on the interest that $5 million would have accrued had it been more carefully invested.
The staff report shows that 95% of the City's investment funds are with the state-managed Local Agency Investment Fund, which is highly liquid. The other 5% is invested in CD's. Of course, as of April, 2008, about $1,000,000 of that CD money was with the teetering PFF Bank & Trust, which might have meant that Claremont's golden touch remains intact.
However, it appears that $781,000 of that CD money with PFF matured and was not reinvested with PFF. According to the staff report there's $209,000 left at PFF. - Mansionization: Staff is also presenting the City Council with a report on elements the city might incorporate into its future mansionization ordinance that would govern housing design throughout the city.
- Human Service Program User Fees: The city is raising fees for a number of Human Service Department recreation programs. The staff report for this item indicates youth and adult sports groups will be asked to pay hourly sports lighting fees. Also, adult sports groups and some youth sports groups will be asked to pay hourly field-use fees.
- Public Utilities Commission Protest: City staff is requesting the council appropriate $30,000 to protest a rate increase proposal by Golden State Water Co. to the California Public Utilities Commission. Golden State Water is seeking a 27.24% rate increase over a three-year period.
This is a dance Golden State and municipalities go through every three years or so. Golden State asks for the moon, cities protest to the PUC, and the water company eventually gets a smaller-than-asked-for rate increase, most likely for the amount they were aiming for in the first place. And we get to spend $30,000 getting to that same place. - Sanitation Fee Increase: Irony of ironies, on the same agenda the City is seeking an increase in its municipal sanitation fees (no PUC approval needed here, though the city does have to notify property owners of the proposed increases). The rate increase under Option A would apply to commercial refuse service and to temporary bin rentals. Commercial rates for weekly service would rise from $88.91 to $114.10.
Option B includes a proposed increase for multi-family residences from a current rate of $13.98 to $18.10 per unit, according to the staff report.
According to the staff report, a 2005 court decision ruled that things like municipal sanitation fees are subject to Proposition 218 rules, which means that the city must allow a 45-day notice period for such fee increases. If at the close of a public hearing at the end of that period the city were to receive protests from a majority of property owners in the affected service area, the proposed fee increases would be defeated. Imagine that.
5:15pm - Special CIP Budget Review Session
6:30pm - Regular meeting
225 W. 2nd St.
Claremont, CA 91711
Posts
