HomeMy WebLinkAbout2000-06-06 City CouncilCity of Palo Alto
City Manager’s Report
TO:HONORABLE CITY COUNCIL
ATTENTION:FINANCE COMMITTEE
FROM: .
DATE:
CITY MANAGER
JUNE 6, 2000
DEPARTMENT:
CMR:265:00
ADMINISTRATIVE
SERVICES
SUBJECT:VOTER SURVEY PROPOSAL TO DETERMINE: VOTER’S
NEW INFRASTRUCTURE PREFERENCES AND FUNDING
SENSITIVITY
REPORT IN BRIEF
On July 20, 1998, Council approved .a policy that new or enhanced infrastructure
facilities should be. funded from specific new revenue sources. Since that time, staff has
gathered a list of new projects that are high on the City’s and community’s agenda, with
¯ very roughly estimated costs. After projecting the City’s revenues and expenditures in ¯
the Long Range Financial Plan (LRFP) (CMR:139:00), it was confirmed that the City
would have modest surpluses and that new revenue sources would be necessary to
conduct major, new infrastructure efforts.
Staff recommends that a consultant be hired.to condu.ct a Survey that will identify: 1)
voter preferences and priorities for new infrastructure projects; 2) voter sensitivity to
new taxes to support those projects; and 3) projects that voters favor that are not already
identified in the survey. As requested, a scope of services for such a survey is attached
for Finance Committee review and comments. It is recommended that the Committee
direct staff to identify qualified consultants for interviews.
CMR:265:00 Page 1 of 4
RECOMMENDATION
Staff recommends that, after reviewing the scope of services for a voter survey, the
Finance Committee:
1.Review and comment on scope of services.
2.Direct staff to select appropriate survey firms for interviews.
BACKGROUND
On July 20, 1998 the .Council approved a General Fund infrastructure financing and
prioritization plan (CMR: 191:98). The plan approved by Council included two policies:
1) existing facilities should be prioritized over new facilities for purposes of
infrastructure funding; and 2) new or enhanced infrastructure facilities should be funded
from specific new revenue sources. Since Council adopted these policies, staff has been
working along two paths.
The first path is to identify funding sources for the remaining $21 million of the $95
million infrastructure program identified on July 20, 1998. Council conceptually
approved $74 million from existing revenue sources to address existing infrastructure, but
did not immediately approve staff’s recommendation to raise the balance of the needed
funding from a Transient Occupancy Tax (TOT) increase. Instead, Council directed staff
to work with the Chamber. of Commerce to discuss a TOT increase and other funding
options. The results of those discussions and staff’s recommendations are discussed in
the next installment of the LRFP to be presented June 6 (CMR:269:00).
The second path has involved identifying and prioritizing new infrastructure projects. On
two occasions, staff has pro.vided reports to Council identifying such projects
(CMRs:412:97 and 422:98). The number of new projects and magnitude of costs
associated with them, which ranged from an estimated $133 to $217 million, prompted
Council and staff to delay consideration .until the City’s LRFP was completed and
reviewed by Council. The preliminary LRFP, delivered to the Finance Committee on
February 22, 2000, projected "modest surpluses." An important conclusion was that the
City’s "long list of potential financial needs significantly exceeds these surpluses, which
confirms that either new revenue sources will need to be identified, and ... approved by
the voters; and/or that prioritization and reduction of current and proposed projects and
services will be required."
To partially solve the difficulties of prioritizing the long list of new infrastructure projects
and determining how much voters are willing to tax themselves for new undertakings,
staff recommended that a voter survey or poll be considered. The Finance Committee
welcomed this idea and instructed staff to return with a scope of services when remaining
sections of th~ LRFP were presented.
CMR:265:00 Page 2 of 4
DISCUSSION
Attachment A is a draft scope of services for conducting a voter survey. There are two
purposes for this survey. The first is for voters to identify their highest priorities or
preferences for new infrastructure projects. It is important to note, however, that prior to
surveying voters, Council and staff have a significant task in deciding which projects to
cite in the survey. It is expected that a list of high profile projects (four to six projects)
will be provided to the consultant to conduct the survey. The survey will also ask voters
if there are projects they favor that are not on the list. The second purpose of the survey
is to determine how much voters are willing to pay for their high priority projects, i.e.,
what is the voters’ sensitivity or threshold for new taxes such as General Obligation
bonds.
Information provided in the LRFP shows that Palo Altans have a higher overall debt
burden when compared to other communities. This primarily results from the Palo Alto
Unified School District’s "Building for Excellence" program. In addition, voters in Palo
Alto are facing a number of potential tax or rate increases for Santa Clara Water Valley
District, and PAUSD programs, as well as City initiatives.
Within the context of existing debt burden, future financial demands on voters, and the
community’s desire for numerous new projects, a voter survey is critical. This survey
will provide invaluable input to Council in defining and financing the City’s highest new
infrastructure priorities. After the Finance Committee reviews and provides input on the
survey scope of services, staff will identify appropriate consulting firms for potential
interviews. Once a consultant is selected, an "all-hands" meeting will be held with the
consultant to discuss the purpose of the survey and to answer questions. The next steps
involve developing and reviewing the survey, conducting the survey, and interpreting its
results.
RESOURCE IMPACT
It is roughly estimated that a basic voteropinion survey conducted by telephone will cost
between $20,000 and $25,000. Funds for the survey will be allocated from the
Administrative Services Department’s 2000-01 budget.
POLICY IMPLICATIONS
The approach contained in this report is consistent with prior policy direction from the
Council and the Finance Committee. Implicit in the approach to fund high profile, new
public infrastructure projects from new revenue sources is an assumption that the City
may not be able to subsequently request General Obligation bonds from its voters for
another decade.
CMR:265:00 Page 3 of 4
TIMELINE
A timeline for the survey will be determined after
Committee and full Council on new infrastructure efforts.
discugsions with the Finance
ENVIRONMENTAL ASSESSMENT
This report on infrastructure planning represents preliminary policy assessment and
direction to staff. It does not require California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA)
review. Infrastructure projects will be subject to environmental review as they are
developed.
ATTACHMENTS
Attachment A: Draft of"Request for Responses-City of Palo Alto Voters Survey"
PREPARED BY: Joe Saccio, Manager, Investments and Debt
DEPARTMENT HEAD APPROVAL:
CITY MANAGER APPROVAL"
Director, Ad0~inistrative Services
E~ILY HARRISON
Assistant City Manager
CMR:265:00 Page 4 of 4
ATTACHMENT A
DRAFT SCOPE OF WORK FOR VOTER SURVEY
The City of Palo Alto is soliciting responses from public opinion research firms
interested in conducting a survey of the City’s voters. There are two purposes for this
survey. The first is for voters to identify their highest priorities or preferences for new
infrastructure projects. A list of high profile projects (four to six projects) will be
provided to the consultant to conduct the survey. The City also is interested in learning
which projects voters favor that are not on the list. The second purpose of the survey is
to determine how much voters are willing to pay for their high priority projects. In other
words, what is the voters’ sensitivity or threshold for new taxes such as General
Obligation bonds.
By the time the survey is conducted, the City will have gone through an extensive process
in identifying potential new infrastructure projects. City departments will have provided
a long list of prioritized projects for Council review. In turn, the Council will have
reviewed department recommendations and narrowed them to the highest priorities. It is
this list that will be used for the survey. Examples of new projects under discussion
include a Library Master Plan, major work on thoroughfares to calm traffic, and
construction of a new police building. One of the major assumptions in conducting the
survey is that the City should seek voter approval for higher taxes but once in a decade.
Palo Alto is a thriving, largely built-out community with a highly educated, affluent,
articulate and publicly minded citizenry. Having a population of 61,000 residents, the
City provides a wide and high level of municipal services for its size. These include
police, fire, public works, planning, building, transportation, and community services.
The City has six libraries, eight fire stations, a golf course, a Cultural Center, a Children’s
Theatre, a Community Theatre, a Junior Museum and numerous parks and open spaces.
The City offers a considerable array of social, recreational and cultural programs such as
human services for seniors and youth, subsidized childcare, concerts, art exhibits, team
sports and special, holiday events. Because of a diverse and healthy revenue base, the
City has been able to provide these extensive services.
The growth in current revenue sources, however, cannot keep pace with the desire for
new projects and the need to rejuvenate existing facilities. Iris important to note that the
City is considering an increase in its Transient Occupancy Tax and an extension of its
Utility Users Tax to interstate and international calls. These increases are proposed in
order to rebuild the City’s aging infrastructure. The City of Palo Alto is also in the
process of establishing a new downtown parking assessment district and seeking voter
approval for a storm drain rate increase. Moreover, there is increasing pressure from
outside jurisdictions, such as w~rious school and water districts to ramp up their own
infrastructure programs by increasing fees and assessments on Palo Alto property owners.
It is necessary, therefore, for the City to hire a consultant who can efficiently and
accurately identify the community’s major new project priorities and their willingness to
pay for them~ It is expected that the surveyor will work closely with City staff in
developing an appropriate survey. If your firm is interested in this project, please provide
the following information:
General firm description: Describe the history and experience of your firm with a
focus on surveys for public agencies in California that are similar to Palo Alto’s
request.
Staff resumes: Identify the principal staff to be assigned to this project, their
respective responsibilities, and the location of their primary office. Provide a brief
resume of each staff member including their experience in conducting surveys in
California.
Scope of services: Based on the request above, summarize your understanding of this
project and describe the services you will provide the City. Staff envisions an "all
hands" or kickoff meeting, a meeting with council members and staff to review survey
questions, a meeting to discuss survey results, and a presentation of results to Council.
Provide a discussion of your methodology to include: sample size, method of selecting
samples (representation of all geographic and demographic areas is important), survey
techniques, and the level of confidence expected for the survey. It is expected that the
survey and its results can be completed within an 8-9 week time frame.
¯Time frame for survey: TBD
¯Proposed fee: Itemize the fees for your services and include an estimate for any out-
of-pocket expenses.
Client references: P~ovide a list of your recent clients (contact person and phone
number), particularly those with projects similarto the City of Palo’s. A sample of a
survey for one these clients is highly desirable.