seeing no one will continue with the item of the time the agenda which is strategies to increase capital funding to streets and related infrastructure good afternoon mister chair and committee members we've been doing a series of meetings  talking about the street fund and the condition of the roads and then also a broader discussion on infrastructure city infrastructure and just to give you an idea of the meetings we've done to date there's been five meetings we've had and we've gone through this path and looking kind of having that's an ongoing discussion about what to do about the street funds and then getting into the broader discussion of the larger infrastructure and seemingly to be honing in on a couple different strategies one would be a new revenue source and then also about making adjustments to the way we do things to create cost efficiencies and then also doing some cost shifts so today what we want to focus on is two things we want to start talking about what are the potential cost shifts that we would do and that would be done in a mid cycle budget for fy seventeen and then we also want to start narrowing the various options for new revenue sources we've talked about the new tax new sales tax but we've also got a number of options that we we want to just make sure that you've considered them and there may even be more that we're not thinking of that you want to bring up so kind of two parts to that meeting what that will do is that i'll take us into a meeting in june th where we'll talk more about the new revenue sources and then we'll come back to you on july  th for some fine looks something that's really kind of packaged together for a recommendation to council so to start off the presentation just talking there's the overview what we want to do is when i first talked about the cost savings efficiencies that we've already completed so there's some good news on the table then look at those potential cost chefs we want to pause the discussion at that point and look at the list that we've generated in cost shifts and just talk about it a bit before we move on to the new thought which are those potential new revenue options so getting into the cost savings and efficiencies we have operational changes that were putting forward in streets and one of the things that we talked to you about early on is th streets crew they used to actually do a lot of pavement maintenance and we've kind of gotten away from those activities in the past as our equipments got an older and we haven't replaced it so the the thought and the strategic thought about doing more with what we have is to actually buy some equipment some smaller equipment this is in some recommendations from the la sea report and those are actually the two pieces of equipment you know up on the screen that we're looking to to purchase the top one as a million it grinds the street down and the second one is an overlay machine and so we would actually put our our street crews to work to repaving streets and so that's the the redirecting to increase those activities which is on the right the street paving and sidewalk repair and replacement storm drain maintenance and then reducing some of the other activities the graffiti removal right away trash pickup illegal encampment cleanup and how do we how do we reduce those can and that will relieve one full time equivalent from our our streets crew to to be committed to other street related activities we would still need to work with maher borg and a future contract on nailing that down completely then an illegal encampment we talked to you about moving that from streets to big green and having the police department have that responsibility just calling big green and having that contracted so  that's seems to be working well and then portable restrooms this is the we used to have two portable restrooms on yan and only next to the labor line we've reduced that to one for savings of nine thousand dollars the graffiti removal is still working on how that would be contracted out we have some salary savings that we're looking at in the the first one is proposed for fy seventeen one of the project engineers would be shifted to a general fund position so that would be a measure a funded currently would move to a general fund if the council approves that budget and then we also have some vacancies that are being placed on hold in in in transportation section our division so in that there's a plan or half of a planner and then two street workers so we will continue to look on as we have the vacancies on hold we will wait for the outcomes of the la see report to see to determine what are the future staffing levels that are really appropriate before we start refilling of positions so that's a it's kind of a two pronged strategy we capture some savings now and then also depending on upon what the outcomes of that we can make adjustments so this is a summary of the cost savings and efficiencies that we have done to date so it's actually a pretty sizeable number it's it's not changes it's something that could get some streets of repave with it then we can do some actual work with mention of that it was proposed to lease those machines and then what you just said was to buy those machines that's one question and the other one is do we have any sense of the comparison of cost of this proposal as opposed to what we experienced in terms of contracting that grinding machine and it's you can call it a lease purchase we the way the lease arrangement set up we have we can lease it now and we have until the calendar year than to pay for it but over and above that our city purchasing requirements are such that we need to encumber the entire amount of funds now even if we lease it so so we're moving forward at this time to purchase it recognizing that to it for six months and then buy it is sort of more work than it is just to purchase it and that grinder but that bobcat grinder arrangement you see in a top picture that is approximately one hundred and fifty thousand dollars or so so that's sort of the cost of that now on the paver which is the lower right hand picture that costs is approximately one hundred and eighty zero or so and so we're deferring our final decisions and timing on purchasing that equipment until later this calendar year for two reasons a it's a cost and then b we're training on that top equipment the the  the grinder and we're coordinating with engineering division on their capital projects they're putting together so that we can do sort of the prep work with them that is we're gonna use that grinder to do spot repairs and the pilot project for the spot repairs is residential east side streets and so starting in early july you'll see our staff out there doing those spot repairs on small residential streets and we're gonna get up to speed and see how proficient we can get at that and how many staff we need long term to do that we think it's on the order of six staff but might be a little more and as we get proficient might be a little less but we won't really be prepared to do work on paving until after we've mastered that first set of work and what we don't want to do is purchase a paver and have it sitting in a yard for a few months and then everyone says well look you bought that paver and now you're not even using it so we're we feel confident and we'll be doing good work with the paving machine but we want to sort of incrementally get ourselves into the paving business and so delaying the purchase of that paver until next fiscal years is a good idea we think thank you for that and and then the the other area is as this project is being resumed as i'm understanding this was something that was done but it would be probably be good to have that history of you know and when what are the what is the cost compared to there must have been other ways that this was done it was part of the contracting services at another time is in the audience so i kind of defer to brian on what the capital costs are we've you've heard before the talk about how much does it cost us to pay the a block you know like a residential block and through the capital program it's somewhere on the order of seventy five thousand a eighty thousand dollars per block we're developing preliminary costs of what we think city staff will cost and what we're finding is that even if city staff doesn't work there are some there are some tasks associated with repaving that we would contract out that is if we're going to do large large block paving not just spot repair that grinder that we purchased is too small it's great for spot repairs but it's not good enough for full street wide grinding it would take us a long time to grind a block with that machine so we would probably subcontract out the grinding and we would  subcontract out the tacking of the street after we grind and remove and we would contract out the street sweeping because we don't have a street sweeper and all that said if we had a paving was she and doing it with our staff we believed we c a block for under fifty five thousand dollars that's a ballpark cost but we're thinking we could be competitive if we can beat that eighty thousand dollars a block estimate by twenty five thirty percent and that's our goal and we will after we prepare a preliminary estimate we'll be sharing it with engineering division and their consultant and all agree on what we think the cost is and if we truly are competitive then we'll move forward in fy seventeen early fy seventeen to purchase the paver but we're not going to purchase the paver only to find out that it costs us more than contracting out so without the paver then how are you and you do the grinding what are you going to do to finish the road you're going to contract out for the paving yes we're coordinated with engineering division so basically when we get through it the spot repairs you'll find you know the street surface looks kind of like a quilt might not be pretty you know in a way it's similar to to other type of prep work but then we would coordinate with engineering divisions so as they have the funds to contract the work out for final paving then they would take that up normally it's a part of their contracts they have the contractor do the spot repair on first it says we're doing it first hopefully at a savings we believe it would be savings that's supposed to what a contractor would cost but then there may be some time delay before contract court depressions in the road things like that cracks that are getting into the base but the overall road is not compromised to being completely needing to be repaired and these are and how did how did the east side streets become the candidates for the pilot projects largely from logistics just because they're very proximate to our yard here at garden street so in terms of time to get out in the field and do the work it's the most efficient that you could have that's right and and so some things  have to put on trailers but the bobcat for example we could probably just drive down the street okay and are the eve where is the east side streets in the normal cycle of maintenance you know we have th okay and we're doing largely residential streets that aren't getting much more than cracks hill okay historically so these streets many of them haven't been paved in a long time okay these are streets these aren't the collectors or the arterial streets either the small residential streets that just haven't had much attention so in the zone system you're not touching residential streets you're just doing collectors it's gotten to that level of triage i would i would refer to mister d'amour but that's my understanding i think there's one one z two z's were for whatever reason or residential street gets gets paved but as a general rule it's the larger streets that are getting the contract work it's not the small residential  streets brian d'amour city engineer okay so yeah i think chris answered that question fairly accurately for the most part you know we we have with our two million dollar budget or whatever it's been of late  limited funds there's more need in each zone than the amount of money that we have so we have to come up with a way of prioritizing and the roads that get the most use rise to the top if the pci's are equal obviously that makes sense but even when the pci on a major arterial it could be higher than a pci on a residential but it's at greater risk of degrading more quickly because of the amount of loading that is on it those streets have been getting a lot more of the attention that's why you'll see like las positas has been overlaid large sections of that recently state street as well those are the roads that are getting the attention with the capital money but hopefully moving forward having our streets crews more available they can touch on some of these residential streets where maybe all they need are some repairs in different areas if it's a wheel path or just point repairs that's what we're hoping to do to hold those roads together they may not get a full repave we're trying to make the most use of the limited funds that we have i don't know that we're going to get to a point where we're able to repave every street in the city on a twenty year basis that's the ideal but i'm trying to make the best use so i think in the last year there was some slurry seal done on some residential streets and it if you're driving by it may look like we've repaved that street but really it's just a thin coat on top of it and that's typically done after an overlay five to ten years out just gives it a fresh coat and preserves the life it's a good practice to do that and we still try to although this current year we will not have a slurry sale contract so we don't have that option that just wasn't going to be a big enough size to attract the slurry scale contractors and actually it turns out the project was small enough that we had a hard enough time attracting any interest in the overlay contract so you weren't able to get a contractor or do you only had one bidder will be going to council shortly with an agenda item we got one bid for project zone three and the bid the one bid came in over the engineer's estimate and zone three is where primarily in the west side okay and so it's primarily arterials on the west side it's a it's a significant subset of the whole zone what percentage of the whole zone is getting work of any kind is it twenty percenters at fifty percent i don't know i would guess it's probably more in the matter of do the work where we're targeting estimating twenty thousand dollars a year for homeless encampment remove and thus far this fiscal year they've been under twenty zero so we'll be starting again in july  we're hoping it's going to stay in a twenty thousand dollar range but if it goes up a little bit fine well we'll work to adjust that but you can see from just the number there that you know we're saving quite a bit by not paying our street staff to get involved with the process and we did check in with county swap workers a couple things are going dynamically with that a the sheriff's department is working to change basically the penal requirements so that more people are not really in the swap program at all you know they're just getting released instead of being imprison and so there's just a smaller source to begin with and we do pay costs or we do have liabilities associated with swap workers in that if they get injured while they're working for us then we we pay they're basically they're workers comp costs and so we think it's a good move to get away from the swap program and for financial reasons and so we think that this will be cost effective to use a contractor for this effort in the coming fiscal year that's basically the salary and fringe of a worker that was doing that work and the right of way trash pickup does that fall into the same i know that was a you shifted that position over to the general fund no we shifted it over to the existing marburg contract and so we've got some issues to work out with that it's not going as smoothly as we had planned there are some limitations to the renegotiated at some point in their future within the next year and so we're hopeful that that scope will work would be increased to deal with that so that might result in an increase in a barber contract which would be less negotiated that a few years ago we increased i think we actually doubled the amount of illegal dumping the trash to pick up on the public right away from a thousand to two thousand pickups a year so this shift to were eliminated not a street fund where they're going to be solely responsible for this function is we think it's a good idea but we're going to have to work with them to make sure that you know there's an amendment to the contract so we were going to mike we want to make sure that they're compensated for an incremental cost we don't know what that number is but there they've been very cooperative in general they've exceeded that two thousand pick up number already this year so you know and they haven't really come back and asked for that so we would want to make sure we are sensitive to the fact that this is a change and what we've asked them to do into the agreement and that they feel that they're being a compensated for that but we don't see a big problem with this transition well just to be clear this is a reduction in service though because currently city employees go on atom and responsive basis and go pick up trash that's on the street and now we're asking to do it and they're plugging it into their system and it's taken a couple of days and yeah but to be honest i think marburg has been doing the lion's share of that work the city staff has been doing some of that but marburg has been doing most of that work so this is just expanding what they're already doing and then taking that responsibility more officially away from the streets of crews and just shifting it all to the marburg but they're doing a lot of it now so it's a it's a smaller incremental increase from what they're doing today to the additional work but isn't it true that that's less it takes longer for things to be picked up in this new model than it did previously yeah we're not sure we're working with marburg to see how quick they can actually pick it up and it may be a day or two but we're trying to work with them as part of this to see if they can get quicker response was not sitting on the streets love you know for four or five days so that part in terms of level of service the turnaround it might be better the way it's handled now but again it's for a smaller portion of that pie that their that cities reach crews were working on marburg has been doing this for many many tons of  material for the last several years the streets crews have been doing a very small portion of that so i don't think people are gonna notice much of a difference but we're still gonna try to make sure that the incremental piece that marva picks up that is going to be done on a more timely basis if possible i know this has certainly been a topic where residents are concerned and looking for additional service not reduction but in the context of what we're struggling with you know i understand the tension between those two but i just wanted to highlight that chant this change involves a different approach that may or may not be better than what's going on now and needs to be refined as time goes on to be i would agree with that do need to change the way it's set up now because it is not working at least on the east side and west side where things are sitting out there for weeks at a time and we don't know how long it's taking in some situations because someone may not be reporting it so a couch may be out there for a week before someone calls it into the city so it's hard to it's hard to track it so i think we need to really rely on a process that's robust and best practices right and then make it work so thank you for that  well this is just i think this is we're getting to where it really matters i think what we say so just to be precise on that on what you're suggesting councilman dominguez i think is more than what's being contemplated i don't think i think it's all still going to be driven by week to to complain nothing's going to happen it's going to be on the curb i don't think anybody's contemplating a roving band of trucks that would just pick up stuff on their own so if you were thinking in those terms i think we need to be first week we heard about the spot repair idea using staff which is now allocated to another use which we street maintenance though i think was the term used and so that's and i'm assuming that that work was either not done at all or it was contracted out and now we're going to in house with either work that wasn't being done or and now we're going to start doing it in house and am i correct on that and or we were contracting it out in the past so now the question there is id which i asked earlier was we want to watch the look at those costs and make sure that we're not as we've experienced with other things found that our own in house work is actually more expensive than the private sector and then what we're talking about here is contracting out a service which is now fte work and and and and those costs are being reduced by seventy two thousand dollars and that's that right i know anyway some amount from from where it is now any other questions comments okay keep going so cost chefs are is a discussion about what to do in the interim when we talk about new revenues the new revenues and getting those can  take a lot of time you know perhaps one to three years getting those new revenues set up the the instruments for doing those things going to people for votes and things the cost ships are about what could we do within the next year's budget  to make a difference and and they're not you know this is a creative thought process and none of them are easy or or you know you know it's moving money from the things that the streets fund are paying now to other funds and resources so that's what that list looks like so we're just going to go through them and just let you know what worth what the thoughts are there may be more so in terms of general fund potential general fund transfers the thoughts are the list that you have up there that are now street funded activity so the graffiti and removal which is estimated to be about a hundred and ninety seven thousand the land development or review i think we've we've mentioned in the past the three ftes that four hundred thirty thousand were shifted from the general fund to the street funds to help the general fund one and it needed help so that's a potential target the illegal encampment cleanup which is the remaining portion that mister toth mentioned at twenty thousand and then measure measure a engineering there's four ftes remaining that are still funded by measure a and so the thought there is that those would be transferred to the general fund and then they would start  so those are the transfers from the general fund this is a potential efficiency in terms of who does the work right now storm drain maintenance the little that we do is done by streets wastewater section has the proper equipment the bacter trucks that can do that better so the thought there is to get the equipment efficiency that they already have not to have wastewater section pay for that service but to just simply transfer the funding to that to someone who could probably do it better and then the efficiency saving is actually the maintenance cost on a new vector in that forty five thousand is the maintenance cost on a new vector truck so small savings but  it all adds up the next one is about measure b and just to be really super careful about talking about measure b is the the ordinance allows for you can see it's written up there and what it does so it focuses on improvement of water quality the council has made policy direction to staff in terms of focusing on new and expanded programs not servicing that which we're already doing so in in of the sidewalk maintenance you could actually maybe even put this in the new revenues category or you could put it in cost chefs a good fit in either one but it's essentially it's the the thought we brought to you in a previous committee meeting of other cities are doing where they're transferring the cost of sidewalk repair and liability over to the property owners that have the sidewalks in front of their property and there's many many ways and variations to do that that cities have have put forth and we explain the los angeles model but that of our program is about nine hundred thousand dollars that we spend right now and that we could either cover that cost or we could increase the program's ability to repair and replace one and which are we going to have is this the extent of that conversation know if if you for instance if the committee said hey you know we really want you to look further at that and we want you to then then the next meetings that we're teeing up for actually we would bring what we think based on other cities models might work best for santa barbara okay so what we're looking to see that not this is something you want us to bring back all right so we'll have another opportunity to to at least discuss that that's correct thank you and how did you come up with the nine hundred thousand dollars cost estimate of that seem that that i believe is our current budget level that if you look at the our our budget within the street section this includes ftes as well as non non personnel costs but that's roughly our budget so this is what we spend it has nothing in relationship to the need  this is what we budget and and and not necessarily spend we do spend monies out of capital as well that is we've got about five hundred thousand dollars no with two hundred and fifty thousand dollars a year in our capital budget to do  sidewalk related contracts so between this and capital there is a sizable amount for sidewalk repair and maintenance yet we have very large needs  that go beyond that budget level so i am down for sidewalk repairs two hundred and fifty thousand for fiscal year sixteen that's in the capital budget but we also have in our operating budget this level of budgeting that includes ftes and i think it's a large number of fte something on the order of eight and i'll have to check the budget to see if it's a little more a little less but that's that's largely it and so an associated amount of  non personnel expenses that that go along with those ftes our average personnel cost you know load of personnel costs for for maintenance workers on this is something on the order of a hundred thousand dollars or more year so you take eight times that and we're pretty much right up to that nine hundred thousand which doesn't leave a lot for supplies and and materials i mean how much sidewalk are we fixing every year  that's a good question briefly what i understand is you know overall we've got about seven million square feet or sidewalk and our goal is to repair replace twenty thousand square feet a year you can see us up on near state street and a depalma now or doing some work up there with sidewalks but we use two years of capital money in two hundred fifty thousand a year times two and we just let out a contract earlier this year that largely went to the west side neighborhoods where we spent about four hundred thousand dollars or so repairing and replacing sidewalks on west side residential streets i don't have the square footage of that contract right right before me but but we're whittling away at it it's just that i mean we're trying to repair and replace streets it's just i mean sidewalks but it's just that we're not going to be able to do this a long term to keep up with the pace of deterioration mister chair customer right yeah i mean that's i think i think of whittling away as making progress and we're not at least my understanding is we're not i wouldn't hope that as we're having the conversation we're calling a spade a spade and grow we're not something like three hundred and fifty is that the roughly a little over two hundred and fifty miles of street right so you multiply that by two but yet a lot of our streets don't have sizes ask for a number of reasons and  i think that's a good assessment right now right yeah i hope that that we're talking the same language of no we're not whittling away at it it's whittling on us you're absolutely right by saying whittling away i didn't mean to say that we're would have to get back with you on that number i i would say you could double it or triple it easily okay do we do a grading system like we do on the streets we have had a consultant do that in the past where they basically took the sidewalk defects and labeled a categorize them is a b and c that studies approximately twelve or more years old sidewalks have changed since then we're coordinating internally with our i staff to improve our gis so that we have a sidewalk layer so we have a container which to plug in all these data points of the work that's done we don't have that now we're relying on spreadsheets and pieces of paper and it's difficult for us to get a comprehensive picture over what we've done the last number of years with sidewalks but i am calling mister chair that there is a number that was plugged into the when we were doing all the unfunded liability stuff that there was a sidewalk number in that as well obviously it's going to be ballpark ii but that might be helpful for you and us to be reminded of what that number is  go ahead mister f so the final cost shift thought is the downtown waterfront shuttle this is funded by three different sources right now downtown parking waterfront and then measure a and so the measure a portion is about six hundred and fifteen thousand so the thought there is that we would we would break up the the cost of the shuttle between you know the waterfront of the downtown and we've estimated based on you can see the service area on the map in blue that the at the waterfront area portion if you if you look at the service hours on that versus the downtown portion it's about seventy five percent for the downtown portion and the remaining for the waterfront portion  those suggested numbers up there for waterfront and downtown parking are something based upon the the total cost divided by the seventy five and twenty five percent and the the contract  expires next year so it is an appropriate time for us to start looking at what is the service valuation and looking at the funding source the other issue that we have is the actual replacement of the vehicles which mtd is coming forward with their proposal pretty soon to tell us what their thoughts are on replacing that fleet so here's the summary of those cost shift thoughts she and you see when you start to add them all up it begun begins to look like a pretty strong number the the one that staff is kind of leaning forwards in terms of the most straightforward i guess way to put that with the the service changes we're looking at with the shuttle astiz two is the transfer the shuttle the downtown waterfront shuttle  funds into the waterfront in the downtown parking so but here's where i'm going to pause on this slide and and see if there's any feedback from the committee to see if any of these i think i heard from community member white about the the  looking at the sidewalk maintenance to property owners but looking for your direction okay comments from the committee bots i guess i have a question so transferring the first four items a little over a million dollars in cost from the streets fund the general fund is just really an accounting issue it isn't making isn't it's just causing a million dollar deficit on the general fund side so it doesn't it it's a decision almost related to changing capital projects and saying we're gonna have fewer capital projects for the general fund for other things besides streets  measure b issues are different in that but they have the same implications to measure b they have there they come at a cost to measure b projects and then the property owner tift is  clearly a significant change from the sidewalk maintenance to property owners and the trend the downtown waterfront shuttle the same i guess within the enterprises funds in terms of their impact so when i see we have staff here i think  and i appreciate your making the point that this there's a bookkeeping move here on the first number of items and i would see that doesn't make more money it just so what your conclusion out of that and that's helpful to for us to consider is so that would basically be taking a chunk out of the capital program comes that's got to come out of somewhere member i mean yeah these are all tough it's kind of why we're up against it because these are all important things to do but none of our funds are in a real healthy position to kind of take on that responsibility i think our idea of putting the general fund options are on there is that perhaps in the past they've been funded by general fund or they seem more appropriately if you're just starting from to be funded from the general fund the general fund is not in a great position right now to absorb those costs and they're really ongoing operational cost and so it's either finding a million dollars in our operational general fund budget our starting point is about a million dollars a general fund capital and then from other sources we're able to kind of build it up to two or three million dollars and so it's essentially replacing your general fund working from is we've no matter what our budget is as we come to july st and finalizing a budget i'm imagin that the team the fulls the full staff team in terms of presenting something has to have a hard time proposing to spend as little as we've as was and that okay how do we do differently and what's what's our how do we prioritize triage going forward and i'm very interested in in hearing staff recommendations this it's not just i mean we got there by the uut going south on us and as one element of this two year budget in my correct and another one is that our forecasts were off by this in the second year would those be a couple of things that for the general thunder the street fund or for the city system and and and and was how did we get here and then going we don't want to get here again i guess that's part of where i'm headed is to say all right is it forecast that that hurt us in here so that going forward as we see things are and you know in the way it feels out there if things feel kind of tenuous so quarterly as we go along do we see that we're our forecast was going to be three percent and we're ending up at two percent growth or whatever early on and we're hitting it perhaps a little harder might help us to then start for example this hiring chill which nobody wants but one wants it if that's a way to get two million dollars three million dollars into the paving fund or whatever is going to be the minimum number that we feel is tolerable i'm wandering around in my comments but i do want a staff recommendation out of out of these things of how do we you know what's it what number are we shooting at  as a as a target for you know here's three million three now does that is on top of this would there be the nine hundred thousand dollars that is already budgeted so then we'd end up but four two would be the paving number that we'd be talking about if all of this were to magically happen and this is this is this is actually part of a mid cycle we're not talking about this hitting this budget cycle but midway through the  that right yeah i mean staff is happy to come up with some recommendations all these are tough choices and they're tough political choices and so we can take the first stab at throwing out there and you all can react to it at some point we're going to need you to react to it and give us some direction the general fund i don't think we're gonna carve savings more savings out of the general fund to put into the streets program i think council gave us direction on deferring some capital projects that put some money into streets capital i think that was a good decision and so that's good so that'll bump up the capital a little bit we're hopeful that something will come out of the governor's budget proposal that the state will do that will give us some capital money that we're not projecting now so i think we're starting to scrape some things together and on the operational side we've scraped together you know a decent chunk of money and so when you put those together we've got a capital program to kind of bandaid together for another year or so doesn't help solve our trend going forward which is really  difficult the list that you have up here they're all fraught with faculties quite frankly we don't recommend doing the general fund right now but it's something to keep in mind if the general fund budget becomes a little healthier to start shifting some of these things out of the streets fund and the general fund but i don't think the general fund is of the capacity to make those adjustments right now for all the reasons that you just said measure b is very difficult it's always been a challenge politically to talk about what measure p pays for measure b pays for and doesn't  that's why we had that slide in there that talks about prior council policy and direction so i think staffs going to be uncomfortable recommending something that goes against prior council policy and direction council can recommend a change to council policy and direction but i don't think it's fair to ask staff to kind of go against what has been passed practice in that regard and quite frankly we highlight the downtown waterfront shuttle for trying to come up with some money somehow we think that that is the opportunity for you to s funds to other funds that aren't going to be thrilled about taking on those responsibilities waterfront didn't budget for two hundred thousand dollars to help pay for the waterfront downtown shuttle downtown parking hasn't been planning on picking up that cost but there's some logic nexus to make that move and we're in a difficult situation here of having to make difficult recommendations and thoughts and so from a staff standpoint when we look at potential three three million dollars that's the one we kind of fall to that you could do and it doesn't come without pain or discomfort to the funds that take on that responsibility well i really appreciate that mister casey and it's none of it's easy and however we i think this is healthy to be looking forward and and trying to squeeze some some more efficiencies out of it and as i say it's just i appreciate that we the council needs to make the change of policy but you're at least highlighting that that's one opportunity to increase funding for paving out of that uncomfortable source and we've got a little bit more to present to you today on the revenue side but but maybe is to get a little more reaction and  future meeting we can kind of bring back kind of what staff recommends when you kind of bring all these sources together how that leads to a capital program and you all can react to that well then i'll just to chime in on the sidewalk thank you  the sidewalk maintenance piece i've been following and maybe i expect that my colleagues have to this this painful process in los angeles where this is on a mega scale a man they're talking they're talking about a billion spending a billion dollars or something like that on on paving on fixing sidewalks and then turning them over and i think it's primarily in the commercial centers and i would be hoping don't i see a mister casey not being skeptical i believe that's it's its commercial bad news there is you have to come up with the money as la is proposing to come up with the money to do the fixing first before they turn it over so there obviously has to be a substantial amount of money and it would be in our case it would be you know  twenty million dollars shall we say or some number like that in order to kick start these repairs to make the some areas acceptable meeting a standard and then turning them over to the private sector i think it's it's one way to go which i think has merit to look at any other comments about that well i think it is fraught with complexities and difficulty i'll be honest with you i can't imagine how we would be able to go to the voters and say we would like you to increase the sales tax to generate money for us to fix some amount of sidewalks probably not all of them and then also have you assume responsibility from that point being going on forward you know it may be necessary in reality i just don't know how that is a politically saleable concept to ask people to raise taxes and then take on the obligation to maintain them it's you know it's something that will be fascinating to watch how they do that in los angeles i don't understand how that makes any political sense at all but good for them for trying and having a conversation about it and i think you know there it highlights how far off revenues and expenditures are that communities are even talking about things like that so i guess i i don't really personally see much utility in the transfers to the general fund i mean i understand that it makes sense we could do this in a whole city we could do this in a completely different way we could say let's take all of the revenues that come to the city for road maintenance the uut dollars the gas tax dollars and the missouri dollars and have and have those all go for streets and then transfer all the costs you know to the general fund and we would solve the problem of paving the roads and we would have a massive problem on the general fund so this is this is just a degree in that continuum you know making asking us the question of does this make any sense to do then i understand these were shifted over to the streets fund from the general fund it there it's all seems awfully arbitrary you know in that respect so good job of putting it on the table don't know that that gets as much at all and i think that the transfers to measure b have a similar problem in the sense that you know what that's the most recent compact we have with the voters where we said we're gonna do something if you raise your taxes and now you know this is potentially changing that compact and i think that's it's very dangerous to do that and i don't think that's not what the voters contemplated and i think that i'm sure that the greeks committee will object and you know we'll have that significant debate and it will influence the future of the claims that we're gonna make about additional revenue in the future and what we would use that money for so it is a it is very slippery slope and it may make sense you know from just a technical standpoint these are things that are related to creek cleanliness but the fact was on the ballot measure we said we were going to do new things with this money not pay for things we're already going on and all of these things i believe are already going on b passed and then the transfer the downtown waterfront shuttle i think that is one that is probably worth talking about because the enterprise funds that would be there were would shoulder that burden are in better discussing it with the board on how to do that and they have some ideas about how to do that they have not yet requested the city's assistance on that that's not you know we don't know for that for sure whether they will or not but there they they're mainly taking seem to be taking the responsibility they looked at another electric vehicle that is in production that would be lower cost than replacing a vehicle that is not in production the the trade off there is of the existing shuttles twenty two feet the new one would be thirty and and then the question would would that shuttle be taken off the shelf or would the body be changed and way to make it look more like the current shuttle which is months about what that looks like and then we'll be talking about the contractual changes to if are any for the future service as well have they said anything about increasing costs and having the contract be more provide more revenue t to provide the same level of service it's just too early to say they haven't said that but you know that is something that we would anticipate okay an original capital for the buses mtd covered those back in the day it was a mix the city did redevelop the redevelopment agency did chip in on i think it was the first two or three shuttles but then as the the man was overwhelming and i think you remember the demand we want to thinks there's something like two hundred thousand to a well any other thoughts about the cost shifts councilmember dominguez so very general thoughts without having more specific numbers but in terms of the movement to the general fund i think anytime we're kind of  making bookkeeping moves that make the use of funds more aligned with the sources and the other spending out of the fund i think it probably makes sense because otherwise you end up in a situation where ten years from now we have a lot of things that we're not sure why they were there we forget and then we have to clean up a lot more which is more difficult so i'm always in favor of incremental changes even if they're not going to be the primary source of fixing the problem which is either increasing revenue or decreasing costs so i don't think it's the it's going to accomplish a lot but i think it's important that we do it just as a matter of moving forward the moves to measure b it seems it's more of a legal policy decision are these things that will be supported  by by measure b the city attorney can sort that out and make sure that it is again those are intermediary measures that aren't going to solve the bulk of the problems but if these are things that do me legal muster then seems like it's a good way to get this started until we do have the funds from another source again that may may or may not ever so i'm gonna take the more pragmatic approach which is do the little things until we can get the big things done and then make whatever shifts we would need to at that point and regarding the shuttle again yeah i think once we evaluate the level service look at the who's using it and where they're going and make sure that  the whatever comes in to replace these shuttles makes sense based on that demographic and those use models i know overall mtd usage is dropping so we want to make sure we're not increasing if it's going to be a service that's going to be decreasing in terms of how many people are using it so i commemorating remember why it has been going down steadily and certain portions of the year are affected more than others but i think it there has been some the the downtown parking committee has expressed an interest in looking at  some of those changes in how how what is the best way to serve the downtown of the need of the the original idea which was the the people mover the park once mentality right and does does mtd contribute any dollars toward that and or is this just completely funded by says the city contract they do they they they do subsidize it they you know i think there's you know it's a billion have never really done a study to say this is exactly you know how much it is mt ds is charging us ninety dollars of revenue our and they're saying that that's a really really good deal that the cost is more and as we are real familiar with the transit you know  subsidizes much of the transit you know usually to the tune of fifty percent on a line so there is some subsidy there we haven't nailed down exactly what it is but i think that would be helpful to know  is a compact with the with the boaters as you said and with obviously with our hotel system and  i don't want to break that bond i'd like to hear what i mean but what else are we going to do i mean are we going to is the preference that the streets don't get cleaned how do we cut back on the street sweeping for example or do we invade the the measure b funds which have not been that measure b now covers half of some portion of street sweeping doesn't it half cherrick councilmember y at measure b covers the residential portion of the street sweeping program which is approximately two thirds okay as i understand it measure b contributes to make up the difference between what our costs are and what we get from parking enforcement revenue and so a big fraction of some kind like that i think that last year the revenue from parking enforcement was something around six hundred i might be way off but i think but but i think that the greeks contribution from measure b was on the order of a little over a hundred thousand or one hundred and fifty thousand in the in the recommended budget for fy seventeen it's a hundred thousand dollar contribution this year the range has gone anywhere from seventy thousand to two hundred and fifteen thousand okay over the years okay and then this would the proposal in that's think that the and then i do ask about the land development review fee obviously i'd raised the question about planning cost planning fee costs were these included in the subsidy when we were talking about what portion of costs are covered by plans planning fees were these positions included in that whole package they were okay all right well as i mentioned before that's that's an opportunity for long term i hope that we'll keep on looking at particularly in good times  increasing the proportion of cost recovery that developers pay for going forward we've got a very small increment proposed this year i think there's more opportunity there going forward and obviously the need the needs are virtually everywhere for for more funding thank you i think we have our time management question for the committee we have the additional presentation about potential revenue options and what we really only have about ten or fifteen minutes i don't know if you have time to do justice to that or if we should just save that for the next time i'll just for time management purposes our thought was just real quickly is there anything you wanted us to focus on for the next meeting and we'd spend more time the next meeting look at the revenue options and so this was just supposed to be a little teaser to see if there was anything in particular you wanted us to look at or not look at so you could just flip through the slides and tell us where all that m well i guess they all kind of array on a continuum as well there are big things and there are relatively small things i think if we're gonna do big things it's hard to justify the it'll be hard to sell the pain of the small things if we're trying to do the good things big things i mean for example the on street parking pricing is a big increasing fees for land development i think assessment districts are an alternative to a general revenue approach not not supplementary i don't i don't see them that way i think you sort of do one of the other i am interested in knowing about borrowing against future measure a revenue is a way to jumpstart funds in the short term and what staff thinks about the very low interest rate environment that we're in today and borrowing costs being about it's low historically as you could have versus the ability to manage a big contract like that and have that work be done and how disruptive that would be to do it one fell swoop  i think the dining revenues is sort of along the same lines as councilmember white was talking about as a long term revenue source relatively small and the stormwater management fees actually be a property related fee was just beginning so it would not be subject to vote it would be a majority protest oh really okay but it would require a significant legal review we need we've just gotten extremely preliminary input from the attorney's office on whether or not we larger ones but at least maybe give some attention to each of these i think in some of these a lot of these have merit and and they may not be duplicated for example the assessment districts we can instruct them that their maintenance districts so that their ongoing dealing with maintenance issues versus sales tax measure would be more infrastructure what you know capital infrastructure improvements so i'm not sure that they are i think they could be complementary but we come back with with discussion of all these and you know paying more attention to the bigger dollar items and more emphasis on those to be like well i think just by time we're going to have to do it that way so other comments from council members i agree with that last one i think that we just should pick these are these are mostly longer term proposals and so i think for us to continue right this minute i think that would be a good idea i think i have a i'm afraid mister chair over time that our reality is going to be supplementary rather than one versus the other i just i think that there the the needs are so great that there's going to and then of course the question will be what tolerance the  city is going to have for what scale revenue proposal in a year and a half that's obviously a big one if there was just you know a one cent sales tax increase it was going to happen then that would probably take care of of all needs i don't i'm skeptical about that scale and so i do think it's going to be these various smaller fundings are going to be necessary over time anyway and i don't know how you know you obviously don't throw them all out there on the table all at once but i regret to say that i i just see the unless something magical is going to come out of state and federal areas that virtually all of these are going to be needed in some fashion or another going forward including you know that  the parking parking paid parking on the streets as well i just think it's it may be something that what happened further down the road but it's i think they're most of them are any other comments is there anybody who in the public we'd like to speak to these items is razin razin i follow the actions of the finance committee and the decisions pretty carefully today you've lost me i mean i don't know how you are going to present the package of some of these proposals i know it has a ways to go before you do you know i've gotten bits and pieces of information and so i don't want to go out off half cocked thinking that i know it all i don't what strikes me though is if it's an eitheror thing for the public and how are they going to grasp i mean individual well for instance the funk zone and five hundred of mean how are you going to say okay it's either this or sales tax on the whole community i mean i i would i am wondering is it possible to have overlay this presentation today is for the highly educated it's not you know for mom and pop out there for instance i got the bit of information from mister coat about the major be and how all that money some of that money was supposed to go to the storm drains right i mean that was what i think i heard and so maybe people aren't worried about storm drains until we have a major flood and then you know they'll worry about storm drains but i think what i'm trying to say is is there a way to say okay folks this is what it's going to cost development fees two hundred thousand or whatever and then all of these costs sidewalks for the property owner that's going to come as a huge shock you know for me i would rather not see that happen and give up the street sweeping you know but maybe my neighbor doesn't feel that way maybe they're fine with bearing the cost of nine hundred thousand to fix the sidewalk and i mean that one city santa monica does not do it and some other major cities do it looks like short of an increase in the sales tax the general public is going to be hit no matter what and that's that's what concerns me so and how are you going to break it down so that each segment the developer the private property owner the person who wants the street swept the person who is breaking their neck on the sidewalks are they willing to pay for that i mean somehow is it am i i mean i hope that i am not just unreasonably demanding on this but to justify these some way as opposed to an overall sales tax i think has to happen and i don't know how you're going to get there but i  comments about some of these look rethinking major b for example so you know anything you can do to simplify this for the general public departments or through this finance committee and then the city council would be more than helpful if you have the time and the willingness would be great thank you thank you  i guess for me for staff it would be helpful to me to have the total expense side of this before we start talking about the revenues because it's it's to me it's the scale issue you know like what what exactly is it when we added up all these things what are the numbers that we're looking at and let's let's look at that list that the the council subcommittee put and worked on previously the four hundred million dollar list i think is what the number was and see if that if that list captures the things that we've talked about here adequately you know for what time horizon and whether or not the escalating cost of the deferred maintenance is captured by that number as well that i think is is something that i'm not sure was captured because my my instinct is that the public wants to know exactly the scale of the problem and what a revenue increase proposal would do to that relationship and would la and i think my sense of it is the public would prefer to know that all the bad news and to know how much medicine is required to solve the problem than to be be told that this isn't going to solve the problem but we will have to do more down down the road i think i'm understanding you know that relationship is critical to being successful and being direct and clear with the public so that's that's what the way i'd approach the next phase rather than spend a lot of time looking at all the different ways we could raise revenue let's fine tune what the costs are over the next twenty thirty year horizon and then see what revenue with what nine programs up here that are all very complicated each in and of itself in its own right there's a lot of policy analysis a lot of cost analysis i could see how even you know being a brand new councilmember up here it's it's very intimidating having to to figure out what are the actual implications not only and what it does in terms of raising revenues but what it will do to services and then what are any unintended consequences that could happen when you put in parking is that going to decrease the number of people who show up to support the businesses is it going to increase traffic because people are trying to drive around looking for cheap cheaper parking options so each one of these has a whole lot of discussion involved a whole lot of research so it's definitely going to be a demanding thing and maybe we can do a town hall maybe we can filter it down to some of the ones that make sense but we have to keep in mind this the whole backdrop is services in the state and the country are just more expensive than they've ever been and we're still in a recession a lot of other cities are doing a lot worse than we are a lot of cities have gone bankrupt because of some of these issues and we're not sure exactly we're going to be economically in the next upcoming years so we want to approach these things fairly cautiously