Loading...
SR-12-17-2013-8A - 700-010ID City of 16 Santa Monica' City Council Meeting: December 17, 2013 Agenda Item: 8 °A To: Mayor and City Council From: Martin Pastucha, Director of Public Works Scott Ferguson, Fire Chief Gigi Decavalles- Hughes, Director of Finance Subject: Financing options for construction of a new Fire Station No. 1, the Fire Station No. 3 Seismic Retrofit, and Interim Replacement of the Fire Training Facility Recommended Action Staff recommends that the City Council approve the proposal to finance the construction of a new Fire Station No. 1, the seismic retrofit of Fire Station No. 3 and an interim fire training facility through a $35 million lease revenue bond and direct staff to: 1. Continue with design of a new Fire Station No. 1. 2. Proceed with the construction document and bidding phases of the Fire Station No. 3 seismic retrofit. 3. Proceed with the design of the interim replacement of the Fire Training Facility. 4. Return to Council for authorization to issue a lease revenue bond. Executive Summary Staff proposes to continue with the design of a new fire station at 1337 -45 7th Street to replace the existing Fire Station No. 1 at 1444 7th Street. The existing structure is over 55 years old, does not meet current seismic standards for essential buildings and cannot be upgraded to current codes without compromising current and future service demands. Staff also proposes to proceed with a seismic retrofit to Fire Station No. 3 at 1302 19th Street, based on the results of a 2013 structural evaluation. Staff proposes to proceed with the design of the interim replacement of the Fire Training Facility at 2500 Michigan Avenue. Upon Council direction, staff will move forward with the design and construction of Fire Station No. 1, retrofit of Fire Station 3, and interim replacement of the Fire Training Facility and the development of a financing plan for these projects. 1 Background Fire Station No. 1 The existing Fire Station No. 1 was constructed in 1955 and has surpassed its expected useful life span as an essential services building as defined by the Essential Services Buildings Seismic Safety Act of 1986. The Fire Station must be able to provide essential services to the public after a disaster and assure continued operation of the building. On June 26, 2007, Council authorized staff to execute a contract for a feasibility study for renovating or rebuilding Fire Station No. 1. This study indicated that the existing facility is in need of a seismic retrofit, facility upgrades and building improvements in order to be in compliance with all current codes, including the Americans with Disabilities Act (ADA) and current staffing requirements. Additional analysis concluded that retrofitting the existing Fire Station No. 1 structure would reduce the functionality and without meeting current and future service demands for a fire station that serves Downtown and the northwestern portion of Santa Monica. Current conditions in Fire Station No.1 require apparatus to be parked outside the structure due to lack of space. Staff access to apparatus inside the structure is compromised by narrow aisles. Additionally, storage for personal protective equipment and supplies is inadequate. Seismic upgrades would add wall thickness and additional corridors, further narrowing the apparatus bays and eliminating at least one bay. A new fire station, on a larger site, is necessary to support the Fire Department's current and future operating and service needs. E On January 10, 2012, Council authorized staff to issue a Request for Proposals (RFP) to exchange property for a site suitable for the new Fire Station No. 1. On August 14, 2012, Council authorized an exchange of City -owned property located at 1338 -42 and 1321 5th Street for property located at 1337 -45 7th Street ("7th Street Property "), which would serve as a replacement site for Fire Station No. 1. On October 23, 2012, Council adopted a Resolution adopting the Mitigated Negative Declaration and the Mitigation Monitoring and Reporting Program for Fire Station No. 1 Land Exchange. Staff recommends development of a new 25,000 square foot above -grade fire station to replace the existing Fire Station No. 1. The proposed new facility could include subterranean parking for staff personal vehicles, four surface parking spaces for visitors, seven apparatus bays, staff dormitories, offices and storage requirements for KI personal protection equipment. On October 23, 2012, Council authorized a professional services agreement with Rob Wellington Quigley (RWQ), a California -based company, in an amount not to exceed $1,770,219 to provide design services for the Fire Station No. 1 Project. Fire Station No. 3 In January 2013, the City entered into a professional services agreement with the IDS Group to provide a structural evaluation for the seismic retrofit of Fire Station No. 3 located at 1302 19th Street. The structural evaluation was completed on May 20, 2013, and confirms that a retrofit of the station is necessary. The study identified numerous irregularities and incomplete /deficient structural elements in the building that would not meet essential services building facility standards. Additionally, the study confirmed that these deficiencies can be corrected though a seismic retrofit of the existing building. On July 23, 2013, Council approved a modification to the professional services agreement with IDS Group in the amount of $64,350 for a total contract amount not to exceed $92,350 to proceed with the design and construction documentation services for the seismic retrofit of Fire Station No. 3. Training Facility The training facility for the Fire Department is located at 2500 Michigan Avenue at the City Yards. A burn building and training tower were originally constructed in the mid - 1970s. Two repurposed trailers (one single wide and one triple wide) were delivered in the mid -1980s and designed to serve 129 staff members. In association with the Los Angeles Area Fire Chiefs, the City recently installed a grant- funded Smart Classroom in one of the classrooms designed to enhance communication, education and training within the region. This classroom is equipped with high -speed internet access and a control point where training videos can be stored and housed for later viewing allowing firefighters to view trainings at their convenience. Although the facility was partially modernized with new technology, it does not offer other amenities necessary for modern fire management training standards. The facility lacks sufficient restroom facilities, lighting and HVAC systems. Training rooms are not flexible and locker and shower facilities are not offered. Also, the training facility lacks structural stability, and does not meet current ADA requirements Discussion Fire Station No. 1 Staff recommends continuing with the design phase of a fire station on the new site at 1337 -45 7th Street, to replace the existing Fire Station No. 1 at 1444 7th Street. It is imperative the station remain in the downtown area to meet the National Fire Protection Association (NFPA) response criteria. The existing fire station was constructed over 55 years ago from wood frame and stucco and has surpassed its expected useful life as an essential services building as defined by the Essential Services Buildings Seismic Safety Act of 1986. This act stipulates that buildings providing essential services should be capable of providing those services after a disaster. Based on the 2007 -08 evaluation, Fire Station No.1 does not meet the current standards of an essential building. In a seismic event, the existing structure may become unusable including the apparatus and more importantly, the personnel housed within the building may be injured, trapped or lost. A pre- design test fit of a new Fire Station No. 1 station on the 1337 -45 7th Street site indicates that the new structure could fit up to 50 subterranean parking spaces, seven apparatus bays (four pull through and three back -in with the capacity for up to nine apparatus), code mandated personal protective equipment storage and required maintenance rooms for cleaning, a fueling station, lobby, and community room on the first floor. Dormitories for each gender, toilets, showers, a kitchen and dining room, physical fitness, day rooms, and offices for fire fighters and Battalion Chief and Captains offices would be constructed on the second floor. The cost of this facility would be approximately $32 million with an anticipated construction start in spring 2016 and lasting 25 months. Designs would be updated and finalized through the public input process. The current Fire Station No. 1 cannot be upgraded to code without compromising current and future response times. The current call district (service area) require five apparatus and 14 personnel. The Fire Department is assessing deployment models based on the impact of the metro light rail, new hotel development in the downtown area and increasing call volume. Future calls for service demands in upcoming years are anticipated to increase the facility demands at Fire Station No. 1, requiring up to nine apparatus and 20 personnel. This anticipated service demand would be within the capacity of the proposed new station of up to nine apparatus as indicated in the pre - design test. Fire Station No. 3 Staff recommends proceeding with the retrofit of Fire Station No. 3 to bring the existing structure at 1302 19th Street into compliance with current ADA and seismic standards. The existing station is a two -story, wood frame and stucco structure built in 1971 prior to current seismic building standards. The Fire Station No. 3 structure has structural irregularities and deficient lateral force resistance elements that impair its ability to meet the performance objectives of an essential services building. In addition, the IDS evaluation identified numerous non- structural deficiencies which impair building operation, may impede firefighter movements within the building, and may lead to loss of emergency medicine and supply storage. However, unlike Fire Station No. 1, staff believes that a retrofit can be completed in a phased manner to correct these deficiencies while mitigating the impact on operations so that Fire Station No. 3 would remain operational during the retrofit. The retrofit could be completed at an approximate cost of $1.5 million. Training Facility The Fire training facility located at 2500 Michigan Avenue does not meet the needs of a modern fire department. The interim training facility project would replace the existing trailers, incorporate sufficient heating and cooling capacity and ADA compliance and would also integrate modern technology and updated circuits, enabling better M. communication and more efficient service while allowing for integration with the developing City Yards Master Plan. The project would cost an estimated $1.5 million. Funding Options The construction cost of a new Fire Station No. 1 facility is estimated at $32 million, the retrofit of Fire Station No. 3 is estimated at $1.5 million, and the interim replacement of the training facility is estimated at $1.5 million, for a total need of $35 million. With the dissolution of redevelopment, the City no longer has the funding on hand to pay for such a significant investment in capital improvement and must instead consider financing. Staff considered two financing options — a General Obligation bond and a lease revenue bond. The cost of debt service on a General Obligation (GO) bond, which requires a 2/3 voter approval, would be borne by property owners at a rate of approximately $13 per $100,000 of assessed property value. The debt service of a lease revenue bond, which requires Council approval, would be borne by the City. Based on current municipal market yields and the City's bond rating, the debt service on a 30 -year, $35 million lease revenue bond (including issuance costs) is estimated at approximately $2.7 million per year. Results of Voter Survey On August 27, 2013, Council approved a professional services agreement with Fairbank, Maslin, Maullin, Metz & Associates (FM3) to conduct a voter survey on a potential ballot measure for the 2014 election. Between September 23 and 29, 2013, FM3 conducted the survey of 477 Santa Monica voters who are likely to vote in the November 2014 General election. The margin of error for the survey is plus or minus 4.5 percent. The primary finding is that nearly one half of all voters perceive that the City needs additional funds. Forty -nine percent of respondents said that the City of Santa Monica has a great (16 percent) or some need (33 percent) for additional funds to provide the level of City services that residents need or want. Forty percent reported that that they 7 believe there is little or no need for additional funding. The balance of voters (10 percent) is undecided. Only a simple majority of voters (51 percent) would support a $78 million public safety bond measure that would have funded a number of public safety and other improvements including: updated emergency radio communication equipment and a fire training and storage facility. In other words, the level of support is well short of the super majority (66 percent plus 1) needed to pass the measure. City of Santa Monica voters indicate that if the election were held "today," a slight majority of voters (51 percent) would either definitely or probably vote yes, or lean toward voting yes, in favor of a public safety bond. At this time, only 35 percent of voters say they would definitely or probably vote no on the measure, or lean toward voting no on the measure. A further fourteen percent are undecided. Even after asking for a lower public safety bond amount ($48 million), support remained relatively unchanged (52 percent) and significantly below the super majority requirement. In spite of the fact that the necessary super majority of voters do not currently support the public safety bond measure, two- thirds or more consider several of the potential funding components to be extremely or very important. These items include: • Protecting the health and safety of Santa Monica residents (73 percent ExtremelyNery Important) • Maintaining police, fire, and paramedic emergency response times (72 percent) • Ensuring all fire stations meet seismic earthquake laws (67 percent) • Improving 9 -1 -1 emergency training (66 percent) Based on these results, staff identified Fire Station No. 1, Fire Station No. 3 and the interim fire training facility as highest priority public safety projects and recommends funding these projects through a lease revenue bond, with debt service covered by the General Fund. n While the survey primarily focused on ascertaining public opinions on a public safety measure, questions were also asked about financing the City's affordable housing program. The results will be more fully discussed at an upcoming housing study session before Council. Staff is in the process of updating the financial forecast, which will be presented to Council on February 11, 2014. The updated forecast will include the additional $2.7 million annual debt service expenditure, as well as updated revenue projections, and will identify whether, and to what extent, departments must further reduce their budgets and curtail services beginning in FY 2015 -16 to cover this added expenditure. Alternatives Council could direct staff to proceed with a retrofit of the existing Fire Station No. 1 structure at 1444 7t" Street. Staff estimates a timeline of 3 to 4 years for this approach, assuming no unforeseen conditions at the retrofit or temporary station sites are encountered. The most recent cost estimates for this work were generated in FY 2007- 08 and are $11 million for the seismic retrofit, some ADA upgrades and the construction of a temporary station. The actual costs would likely be much higher due to construction cost escalation over the past 6 years and an updated design that would incorporate updated building code, other needed improvements and increased service needs of the downtown core. A retrofitted Fire Station No. 1 would be unable to serve the current and future requirements of a central downtown fire station due to the reduction of functional area throughout the building. Other Fire Department needs not addressed by a retrofit include: ® Upgrades to information systems which require equipment closets (further reducing operational space) ® Support for the full programmatic needs of the Fire Department (physical fitness room, staff service space) F7 • Severely limited space for future growth for additional services that might be required of the department in the future including, relocation of the Urban Search and Rescue, Rescue Ambulances, Command Staff, and additional staffing • Additional restrooms and dorms required for mixed gender staffing Next Steps Dependent upon Council action and approval of the recommended action, staff anticipates the following project timelines: Construction of a new Fire Station No. 1: • Return to Council for review of schematic design — April 2014 • Present design development review to Architectural Review Board, Planning and Council — October 2014 • Request Council approval to issue lease revenue bonds — summer 2015 • Develop a request for bids for construction and return to Council for authorization to negotiate and execute a contract — September 2015 • Start of construction — spring 2016 Retrofit of Fire Station No. 3: • Complete design development and construction documentation phases — May 2014 • Following approval of lease revenue bonds, develop a request for bids for construction and return to Council for authorization to award a contract — August 2015 • Complete construction — February 2016 Interim replacement of Fire Training Facility: • Following approval of lease revenue bonds, develop a request for proposal for pre- design and design services and return to Council for authorization to enter into a professional services agreement — August 2015 • Complete design development and construction documentation phases — November 2015 • Develop a request for bids for construction and return to Council for authorization to award a contract — February 2016 • Start of construction — March 2016 10 Financial Impacts & Budget Actions There is no immediate financial impact or budget action necessary as a result of the recommended action. Staff will return to Council for approval to issue a lease revenue bond that is estimated to add $2.7 million in debt service expenditures to the General Fund budget. Prepared by: Kate Vernez, Deputy City Manager Alex Parry, Senior Architect Approved: Martin Pastucha Director of Public Works roved: Gi0i Decavalles -Hu Director of Finance Attachment: A - Poll Results Memo Forwarded to Council: r Rod Gould City Manager 11 Public Opinion Research & Strategy TO: Interested Parties FROM: Fairbank, Maslin, Maullin, Metz & Associates (FM3) RE: Summary of City of Santa Monica Issues 2013 Survey Date: December 1, 2013 Between September 23`a — 29`h 2013, Fairbank, Maslin, Maullin, Metz & Associates (FM3) conducted a telephone survey of 477 City of Santa Monica voters who are likely to vote in the November 2014 General Election. The margin of error for the full sample is plus or minus 4.5 percent; margins of error for subgroups will be higher.1 The three main goals of this survey are to: (1) Examine general perceptions of the City (2) Gauge the level of support for a proposed public safety bond measure (3) Assess support for affordable housing The key survey findings include: • A majority of voters consider the City to be headed in the right direction • About half of all voters perceive the City does not need additional funds • A majority of voters support a potential Public Safety Bond and many of its proposed projects, but support for the measure never reaches the supermajority (66 percent plus 1) required to pass this dedicated measure • Six -in -ten voters (60 percent) support the City investing funds to ensure there is additional affordable housing available and that support increases to two- thirds (66 percent) after learning more about the City's program ' Respondents were given a choice to conduct the survey in English or Spanish. 2425 Colorado Avenue. Suite 180 1999 Harrison Street Suite 1290 Santa Monica, CA 90404 Oakland, CA 94612 Phone: (310) 828 -1183 Phone: (510) 451 -9521 Fax: (310) 453 -6562 Fax: (510) 451 -0384 Summary of the Key Results from the City of Santa Monica Issues Survey Page 2 The balance of this memo provides a detailed summary of the findings. (1) General Perceptions of the City: A majority of voters have positive views of where the City is headed Fifty-nine percent feel that the City of Santa Monica is headed in the right direction and about one -third (34 percent) perceive that the City is seriously off on the wrong track. Only seven percent are undecided. Nearly one half of all voters perceive that the City needs additional funds Forty-nine percent of respondents said that the City of Santa Monica has a great (16 percent) or some (33 percent) need for additional funds to provide the level of City services that residents need or want. Forty percent identified little or no need for additional funding. The balance of voters (10 percent) are undecided .2 (2) Support for a Public Safety Bond Measure: Initial /Current level of support A simple majority of voters (51 percent) initially support a $78 million public safety bond measure, but the level of support is well short of the supermajority required to pass. Respondents were initially read the following possible ballot language: "Shall the City of Santa Monica issue general obligation bonds for use to protect tine health and safety of Santa Monica residents by maintaining police, fire, and paramedic emergency response times, improving 9 -1 -1 emergency communication technology and training, ensuring fire stations meet seismic earthquake laws, and other City improvements, totaling 78 million dollars, with annual independent financial audits, and no money going to administrative salaries, pensions or Sacramento ?" City of Santa Monica voters indicated that if the election was held "today," a slight majority (51 percent) would either definitely or probably vote yes, or lean toward voting yes, in favor of a public safety bond. At this time, 35 percent of voters would either definitely or probably vote no, or lean toward voting no on the measure. A further fourteen percent are undecided (see Figure 1). 2 Note when results do not equal 100% this is due to rounding errors. Fairbank, Maslin, Maullin, Metz & Associates; Summary of the Key Results from the City of Santa Monica Issues Survey Figure 1: Vote on the Public Safety Bond Total yes Total no Undecided Page 3 Reaction to educational and critical statements about the Public Safety Bond Measure In order to test a variety of Santa Monica voters' opinions (pro and con) about the proposed Public Safety Bond Measure, the survey presented respondents with a series of both educational statements describing the need for public safety upgrades and improvements as well as critical statements suggesting reasons why voters should not vote for the proposed measure.3 Educational Statements After each educational statement was read, respondents were asked to indicate whether hearing the educational statements made them more inclined to vote for the measure. Educational messages that resonated with a sizable majority of Santa Monica voters (60 percent or more) dealt primarily with structurally unsafe fire stations, outdated public safety communication equipment, and the need to ensure that public safety officers can continue to respond quickly to medical emergencies. The above referenced statements are presented in detail below: e Structural engineers have determined some of the City fire stations will be severely damaged during an earthquake, threatening the lives of firefighters and preventing emergency response. This measure will upgrade outdated fire stations to ensure firefighters and paramedics can respond to emergencies during an earthquake (65 percent more inclined to vote yes after hearing this statement). e Santa Monica's first responders rely on decades old emergency communication technology. This measure will improve communication technology among firefighters, the police and paramedics (62 percent more inclined to vote yes after hearing this statement). • Sixty -seven percent of all 911 calls to the Santa Monica Fire Department require emergency medical attention. This measure will provide the resources needed so that Summary of the Key Results from the City of Santa Monica Issues Survey Page 4 first responders can continue to respond rapidly to save lives (62 percent more inclined to vote yes after hearing this statement). Critical Statements Voters were also read critical statements and asked to indicate whether hearing the respective statement would make them more inclined to vote against the measure. The impact of the critical statements is more modest than the educational statements. While the top educational messages garnered 62 to 65 percent of voters saying they would be more inclined to vote yes on the measure, leading critical messages motivated between 44 and 49 percent of respondents to say they would be more inclined to vote no on the measure. The most influential critical statements include claims that the City should already have the necessary funds if they were to cut waste and excessive salaries; the City should not add to its projected deficit; and Santa Monica residents are already overtaxed. The above mentioned statements are presented in more detail below: The City of Santa Monica has enough funds to pay for the proposed public safety projects without raising residents' taxes by just cutting waste and excessive salaries (49 percent more inclined to vote no after hearing this statement). The City projects a deficit of more than $13 million by 2018. Before the City goes into greater debt by issuing bonds, it should balance its books (47 percent more inclined to vote no after hearing this statement). We are already overtaxed. The City has enough funds to pay for the proposed public safety projects without raising our taxes (44 percent more inclined to vote no after hearing these statements). Levels of support after educational and critical statements, respectively A presentation of educational statements increases initial support for the $78 million Public Safety Bond Measure to 59 percent, with 33 percent opposed and eight percent remaining undecided. After the initial vote in response to the $78 million Public Safety Bond Measure ballot summary and a reading of educational messages, voters were asked again how they would vote on the measure if an election were held "today." On the second vote, respondents increased their support by eight percent, from 51 to 59 percent. Opposition slightly declined by two percent, from 35 to 33 percent. Finally, the undecided also declined — from 14 to 8 percent, with roughly six percent moving to the "Yes side" (see Figure 2). After having heard critical statements toward the $78 million Public Safety Bond Measure, support for the measure declines from its high point after educational statements (59 percent), to 55 percent. Opposition increases to its peak of 38 percent, and seven percent remain undecided. Fairbank, Maslin, Mauliin,' Metz & '!Associates Summary of the Key Results from the City of Santa Monica Issues Survey Page 5 After hearing critical statements, voters were asked one final time how they would vote on the $78 million Public Safety Bond Measure if an election were held "today." Fifty five percent said they would vote yes, a decline of four percentage points from the vote after educational messages. The percentage of voters who report they would vote no increases five percentage points — 33 percent from the previous ask to 38 percent. The undecided voter percentage remained largely static, with seven percent unable to decide how they would vote (see Figure 2). Figure 2: Initial Vote on $78 Million Public Safety Bond Measure, Vote after Educational Statements and Vote after Critical Statements Total yes Total no Undecided Initial Yote 59% ® 55% 33% 38% 8% 1 7% 6.% eat 0% n% 4M Support for the Public Safety Bond Measure at different cost scenarios Lowering the amount of the Public Safety Measure from $78 million to $48 million does not increase support for the measure to the two- thirds supermajority threshold. After voters were initially asked how they would vote on the $78 million Public Safety Bond Measure, they were asked how they would vote if the Bond Measure was for $48 million dollars instead. They were later asked again how they would vote on the $48 million Bond Measure after hearing educational and critical statements. In both cases, support for the $48 million Bond Measure hovered in the mid - fifties, well below the supermajority needed to pass. Support remains in the 50 percent range when the respective $78 and $48 million bonds are described in terms of the cost per $100,000 of assessed property value. In the case of the former bond measure, the cost would be $30 and in the latter case it would be $19. Fairbank,' Maslin, 'Maullin' Metz & Associates Summary of the Key Results from the City of Santa Monica Issues Survey Page 6 Importance of how the Bond funds are spent Santa Monica voters most value protecting the health and safety of City residents by maintaining police, fire and paramedic emergency response times as part of any public safety bond measure. Among the many public safety goals and facility upgrades and improvements mentioned as part of a potential bond measure, Santa Monica voters gauged the following five components as extremely or very important at a rate of between 65 and 73 percent: • Protecting the health and safety of Santa Monica residents (73 percent Extremely /Very Important) • Maintaining police, fire, and paramedic emergency response times (72 percent) • Ensuring all fire stations meet seismic earthquake laws (67 percent) • Improving 911 emergency training (66 percent) • Improving 911 emergency communications technology so emergency departments can communicate with each other (65 percent) Less valued public safety - related upgrades and improvements include: • Building a firefighting training facility for local firefighters (35 percent Extremely /Very Important) • Installing traffic congestion management cameras at City intersections (31 percent) In addition to the aforementioned public safety upgrades and improvements asked about, a number of other proposed capital /infrastructure projects were also mentioned. While most public safety features scored close to or above the two - thirds requirement for passage of a dedicated bond measure, other non - public safety upgrades /improvements are considered extremely or very important by a much smaller percentage of Santa Monica voters. Lower rated projects can be grouped into two categories: park and open space - related projects, and others. The former involves the following: • Creating more open space and natural areas (46 percent Extremely /Very Important) • Acquiring additional land to create more open space and natural areas (42 percent) • Improving City parks and recreation facilities (42 percent) • Establishing new community parks (33 percent) • Acquiring additional land for new community parks (33 percent) Fairbank, Maslin, Maullin Metz & , Associates Summary of the Key Results from the City of Santa Monica Issues Survey Page 7 Other City capital /infrastructure projects mentioned and their responses are presented below: • Improving accessibility to City -run facilities for seniors and the disabled (51 percent Extremely /Very Important) • Making additional affordable housing available (49 percent) • Providing additional parking downtown (43 percent) • Creating express parking signals downtown to inform drivers of open parking spaces to reduce traffic congestion (40 percent) • Upgrading and earthquake retrofitting the Santa Monica Civic Auditorium (40 percent) (3) Support for Affordable Housing: Sixty percent of voters initially support the City of Santa Monica investing funds to ensure there is additional affordable housing available. After simply hearing the term "affordable housing," six out of ten voters support the City investing funds to ensure its expanded availability. Three out of ten voters said they oppose the City investing funds to ensure additional affordable housing is available; ten percent are undecided. Respondents were then read the following City- approved description of "affordable housing:" "The City makes loans to non-profit developers to build new apartments or acquire existing buildings that are then fixed up and rented to low - income families who otherwise could not afford to live in Santa Monica. Low income is defined as about $69,000 or less per year for a family of four: The individuals who tend to be helped by this program include seniors, people with disabilities and people with HIV" More education about the City's affordable housing program leads to an increase in the percentage of Santa Monica voters supporting the City investing funds to ensure additional affordable housing is available. After hearing the aforementioned description of the term "affordable housing," support for City investment in additional affordable housing increased by six percent, from 60 to 66 percent. Further, opposition to more additional affordable housing declined two percent, from 30 to 28 percent, with more information. Finally, five percent remain undecided (see Figure 3). Fairbank, 'vlashn, Maullin,'` Metz & Associates: Summary of the Key Results from the City of Santa Monica Issues Survey Page 8 Figure 3: Initial Support and Support after Information on the City Investing Additional Funds Total support 60% 66% Total oppose 30% 28% Undecided IM 10% 1115% W Support for a conceptual affordable housing measure M While two- thirds of voters support the City investing in additional affordable housing, mention of a possible affordable housing sales transfer tax increase receives support from only about 55 to 57 percent of voters at this time. Voters were asked a conceptual question, rather than a fully developed ballot summary question, about how they would vote on an affordable housing measure that would increase the tax for properties sold from $3 per $1,000 of sales to $6 per $1,000 of sales4. Respondents were told that the revenues raised would go to paying for the City's affordable housing program. The conceptual measure received support in the mid - fifties both under a scenario where the increase would only be for homes sold at $1 million dollars or more (55 percent total yes), and in the case where the increase would only be for homes sold at $5 million dollars or more (57 percent total yes). In both cases, this dedicated housing measure would not meet the necessary supermajority vote (see Figure 4). A more developed ballot summary with greater details of the measure may have garnered greater support. " Respondents were asked the following conceptual question: "Tile City is considering paying for its affordable housing program by increasing the tax for properties sold from $3 per $1,000 of sales to $6 per $1,000 of sales. This would apply only to sales of homes valued over ($11$5) million. " A random half the sample was asked at the $1 million dollar sales threshold and the remaining random sample was asked at the $5 million dollar sales threshold Fairbank, Maslin, Maullin, Metz & Associates! Summary of the Key Results from the City of Santa Monica Issues Survey Page 9 Figure 4: Vote on Real Property Transfer Tax Measure Vote at One and Five Million Minimum Sales Threshold Total yes 55% Total no 37% Undecided M 8% 0% 20% 40% 60% 00% 0% 20% 40% E096 80% Fairbanh,'S yXaslin, Maullin,' Metz & Associates Reference: Attachments Filed with Original Staff Report 12/17/2013 -8A Legislative File 700 -008