Loading...
SR 06-28-2016 8A City Council Report City Council Meeting: June 28, 2016 Agenda Item: 8.A To: Mayor and City Council From: Karen Ginsberg, Director, Community & Cultural Services Subject: Consideration of a proposal by Santa Monica College for a potential November 2016 bond measure that would include funding for joint projects between the College and the City of Santa Monica Recommended Action Staff recommends that the City Council consider supporting Santa Monica College's proposal for a potential bond measure on the November 2016 ballot that would include partial funding for the expansion of Memorial Park, adopt a motion in support of the bond, and direct staff to work in partnership with College representatives to define terms of the bond and associated future legal agreements between the City and the College. Executive Summary The Santa Monica College (SMC) Board of Trustees is considering adding a bond measure to the November 2016 ballot and if successful, would authorize a series of bond issuances . SMC has proposed to include partial funding for joint projects with partner agencies including the City of Santa Monica, the City of Malibu, and the Santa Monica-Malibu Unified School District (SMMUSD). City and SMC staff have identified the expansion of Memorial Park to include the adjacent 2.9 acre former Fisher Lumber site as a potential project to be included in the proposed bond. The Memorial Park Expansion project would provide fields to accommodate the SMC both the main th SMC campus and the 17 teams utilize the fields at John Adams Middle School (JAMS) and relocating the teams to the expanded park would free up these fields for other community programming. Background In December 2015, a consultant hired by Santa Monica College (SMC) conducted voter research to determine the probability of a successful bond measure on the November 2016 ballot. Approximately 69% of the Santa Monica and Malibu voters polled indicated they would support the proposed measure. On May 3, 2016 the Santa Monica College (SMC) Board of Trustees considered a proposal for a bond measure that would support 2010 Career 1 of 4 and Educational Facilities Master Plan (Attachment A). An initial list of potential projects that could be funded by the bond was presented to the Trustees and included various le joint projects between the College and SMMUSD, the City of Malibu, and the City of Santa Monica. The Board of Trustees is expected to take action on the bond proposal at its July 2016 meeting and College administration has committed to working with potential partner agencies, including the City of Santa Monica, to further define potential joint use projects in advance of that meeting. Discussion Project Selection City and SMC staff have considered several potential cultural and recreational facility projects that could be supported by the proposed bond and recommend that the expansion of Memorial Park be identified as the joint project of the College and the City of Santa Monica. In 2004, the City acquired the 2.9 acre former Fisher Lumber site adjacent to Memorial Park with the intent of developing the land as an extension of the park. Since that time residents and the Recreation and Parks Commission have strongly advocated for this site to be developed as park space. In both the Open Space Element and t given its central location within Santa Monica. Furthermore, the community has voiced their strong support for this project at several outreach events, including those conducted in 2013 and 2014 for the Memorial Park Neighborhood Plan and most recently at the January and February 2016 Recreation and Parks Commission meetings related to setting Santa Monica priorities for the Los Angeles Countywide Needs Assessment (Attachments B and C). Memorial Park Council on March 22, 2016 (Attachment D) and submitted for the Countywide Needs Assessment final report (Attachment E). The Memorial Park Expansion project would add close to 3 acres to the existing 10.5 acre park soccer programs at a location in close proximity to both the main SMC campus and the th 17 Street Expo station. This would allow other community uses of the JAMS fields 2 of 4 -18 Capital Improvement Program (CIP) includes funding in the amount of $1.35 million in FY 2017-18 for design and development of a master plan for Memorial Park including both the existing park and the new acreage. Funding for construction would need to come from alternate funding sources. The proposed bond would be sold in a series of issuances. SMC and the City will work together to determine timing and availability of funds. Alternatives Council could choose to recommend that the expansion of Memorial Park as a potential in the bond measure and could suggest a different project. Financial Impacts and Budget Actions There is no immediate financial impact or budget action necessary as a result of the recommended action. Prepared By: Melissa Spagnuolo, Principal Administrative Analyst Approved Forwarded to Council Attachments: A. May 3, 2016 SMC Board of Trustees Meeting agenda (Web Link) B. January 21, 2016 Recreation and Parks Commission Meeting Agenda (Web Link) 3 of 4 C. February 18, 2016 Recreation and Parks Commission Meeting Agenda (Web Link) D. March 22, 2016 Council Meeting Agenda (Web Link) E. Los Angeles Countywide Needs Assessment Final Report (Web Link) F. FY 2016-18 Adopted Capital Improvement Program Biennial Budget (Web Link) G. Written comments 4 of 4 Add to 8-A 06/28/2016 Anne Samartha From:Zina Josephs <friendsofsp@yahoo.com> Sent:Tuesday, June 28, 2016 8:00 AM To:Council Mailbox; Clerk Mailbox; Kevin McKeown Fwd; Tony Vazquez; Gleam Davis; Sue Himmelrich; Pam OConnor; Terry OÔDay; Ted Winterer; Rick Cole; martin.pastucka@smgov.net Cc:friendsofsp@yahoo.com; Zina Josephs Subject:FOSP: 6/28/16 item 8-A -- OPPOSE Follow Up Flag:Follow up Flag Status:Flagged June 27, 2016 To: Mayor Vazquez and City Council From: Board of Directors, Friends of Sunset Park RE: 6/28/16 agenda item 8-A https://www.smgov.net/departments/clerk/agendas.aspx 8.STAFF ADMINISTRATIVE ITEMS A.Consideration of a proposal by Santa Monica College for a potential November 2016 bond measure that would include funding for joint projects between the College and the City of Santa Monica Recommended Action Staff recommends that the City Council consider supporting Santa Monica College's proposal for a potential bond measure on the November 2016 ballot that would include partial funding for the expansion of Memorial Park, adopt a motion in support of the bond, and direct staff to work in partnership with College representatives to define terms of the bond and associated future legal agreements between the City and the College. ***************************************************************** While the FOSP Board understands that the Council might favor having Santa Monica College fund the expansion of Memorial Park, and while we realize that the proposed SMC facilities bond a majority of the FOSP Board members urge the measure will probably pass in November 2016, City Council not to support this type of SMC bond funded joint project with SMC and not to support the proposed SMC bond measure. While supporting public education, park expansion, and additional sports field in the city, the FOSP Board is concerned that the proposed SMC facilities bond measure on the November ballot will obligate Santa Monica and Malibu property owners for another $295 or $345 million in college bonds. These would probably cost between $600 and $700 million to pay off. Santa Monica and Malibu property owners are already obligated for $613 million in SMC facility bonds from previous bond measures, which will probably cost about $1.2 billion to pay off. We imagine that SMC will be able to pass the bond measure in November, as their polling shows strong support, and they've been waging a full-court press PR effort all this year in support of the college. However, it seems unfair for the City Council to support a measure that will result in an additional $345 million in debt for not only Santa Monica property owners, but also Malibu property owners, all 1 Add to 8-A 06/28/2016 in return for a few women’s softball fields and soccer fields at Memorial Park, which SMC will undoubtedly claim it has priority to use. Where is the proportional community benefit for Santa Monica and Malibu residents in return for the $345 million bond indebtedness? SMC was able to raise about $468,000 in 2008 to pass its last bond measure, financed almost entirely by donations from the SMC Foundation (whoever that includes), the KCRW Foundation (whoever that includes), the Associated Students, and a series of architectural and construction firms and a law firm that have all profited from working on SMC construction projects. While residents probably cannot raise $500,000 to fund a campaign opposing the next SMC bond measure in November 2016, the FOSP Board hopes that the City Council will not lend support to the we urge the City Council not to support this type of SMC bond college in this endeavor. Again, funded joint project with SMC and not to support the proposed SMC bond measure. 2 Add to 8-A 06/28/2016 Anne Samartha From:Ellen Mark <ellenmark93@gmail.com> Sent:Tuesday, June 28, 2016 9:35 AM To:Council Mailbox; Clerk Mailbox; Kevin McKeown Fwd; Tony Vazquez; Gleam Davis; Sue Himmelrich; Pam OConnor; Terry OÔDay; Ted Winterer; Rick Cole; martin.pastucka@smgov.net Subject:Proposed SMC Bond measure, 6/28/16 agenda item 8-A Follow up Follow Up Flag: Flag Status:Flagged Dear Council Members, I urge the City Council not to support this type of SMC bond funded joint project with SMC and not to support the proposed SMC bond measure. It seems unfair for the City Council to support a measure that will result in an additional $345 million in debt for not only Santa Monica property owners, but also Malibu property owners, all in return for a few women’s softball fields and soccer fields at Memorial Park, which SMC will undoubtedly claim it has priority to use. Where is the proportional community benefit for Santa Monica and Malibu residents in return for the $345 million bond indebtedness? This Bond is NOT in the best interest of our community and specifically the neighborhoods surrounding the College. Sincerely, Ellen Mark Sunset Park 1 Add to 8-A 06/28/2016 Anne Samartha From:Nikki Kolhoff <nhkolhoff@yahoo.com> Sent:Tuesday, June 28, 2016 9:54 AM To:Council Mailbox; Clerk Mailbox; Kevin McKeown Fwd; Tony Vazquez; Gleam Davis; Sue Himmelrich; Pam OConnor; Terry OÔDay; Ted Winterer; Rick Cole; martin.pastucka@smgov.net Subject:6/28/16 City Council Agenda Item 8-A - Say No to New SMC Bond Measure Follow up Follow Up Flag: Flag Status:Flagged o: Mayor Vazquez and City Council T RE: 6/28/16 agenda item 8-A I agree with the FOSP Board comment below and incorporate it herein by reference. I urge it to deny support for a new SMC bond. The bond is proposed at $295 million - $345 million and the burden to repay that falls on Santa Monica and Malibu residents while only 4% of the students at SMC went to SMMUSD schools and only about 30% are even from LA County. SMC is trying to gain support by offering to pay for part of the Memorial Park expansion. This expansion was promised long ago by the City and should be paid for by the City, without giving SMC rights to that public land. There is no way any contribution SMC makes to Memorial Park, and their expected use of the same, is worth $345 million. Please do the right thing for the residents you were elected to represent and say "No." Thank you for your consideration. Nikki Kolhoff Sunset Park Resident From: friendsofsp@yahoo.com To: Council@smgov.net, Clerk@smgov.net, kevin@mckeown.net, tony.vazquez@smgov.net, gleam.davis@smgov.net, sue.himmelrich@smgov.net, pam.oconnor@smgov.net, terry.oday@smgov.net, ted.winterer@smgov.net, rick.cole@smgov.net, martin.pastucka@smgov.net CC: friendsofsp@yahoo.com, zinajosephs@aol.com Sent: 6/28/2016 8:00:09 A.M. Pacific Daylight Time Subj: FOSP: 6/28/16 item 8-A -- OPPOSE June 27, 2016 To: Mayor Vazquez and City Council From: Board of Directors, Friends of Sunset Park RE: 6/28/16 agenda item 8-A https://www.smgov.net/departments/clerk/agendas.aspx 2 Add to 8-A 06/28/2016 8.STAFF ADMINISTRATIVE ITEMS A.Consideration of a proposal by Santa Monica College for a potential November 2016 bond measure that would include funding for joint projects between the College and the City of Santa Monica Recommended Action Staff recommends that the City Council consider supporting Santa Monica College's proposal for a potential bond measure on the November 2016 ballot that would include partial funding for the expansion of Memorial Park, adopt a motion in support of the bond, and direct staff to work in partnership with College representatives to define terms of the bond and associated future legal agreements between the City and the College. ***************************************************************** While the FOSP Board understands that the Council might favor having Santa Monica College fund the expansion of Memorial Park, and while we realize that the proposed SMC facilities bond measure will a majority of the FOSP Board members urge the City Council not to probably pass in November 2016, support this type of SMC bond funded joint project with SMC and not to support the proposed SMC bond measure. While supporting public education, park expansion, and additional sports field in the city, the FOSP Board is concerned that the proposed SMC facilities bond measure on the November ballot will obligate Santa Monica and Malibu property owners for another $295 or $345 million in college bonds. These would probably cost between $600 and $700 million to pay off. Santa Monica and Malibu property owners are already obligated for $613 million in SMC facility bonds from previous bond measures, which will probably cost about $1.2 billion to pay off. We imagine that SMC will be able to pass the bond measure in November, as their polling shows strong support, and they've been waging a full-court press PR effort all this year in support of the college. However, it seems unfair for the City Council to support a measure that will result in an additional $345 million in debt for not only Santa Monica property owners, but also Malibu property owners, all in return for a few women’s softball fields and soccer fields at Memorial Park, which SMC will undoubtedly claim it has priority to use. Where is the proportional community benefit for Santa Monica and Malibu residents in return for the $345 million bond indebtedness? SMC was able to raise about $468,000 in 2008 to pass its last bond measure, financed almost entirely by donations from the SMC Foundation (whoever that includes), the KCRW Foundation (whoever that includes), the Associated Students, and a series of architectural and construction firms and a law firm that have all profited from working on SMC construction projects. While residents probably cannot raise $500,000 to fund a campaign opposing the next SMC bond measure in November 2016, the FOSP Board hopes that the City Council will not lend support to the college in this we urge the City Council not to support this type of SMC bond funded joint endeavor. Again, project with SMC and not to support the proposed SMC bond measure. 3 Add to 8-A 06/28/2016 Anne Samartha From:Jane Dempsey <janedempsey@earthlink.net> Sent:Tuesday, June 28, 2016 9:59 AM To:Council Mailbox; Clerk Mailbox; Kevin McKeown Fwd; Tony Vazquez; Gleam Davis; Sue Himmelrich; Pam OConnor; Terry OÔDay; Ted Winterer; Rick Cole; martin.pastucka@smgov.net Cc:Jane Dempsey Subject:RE: City Council 6/28/16 agenda item 8-A -- Opposition for SMC bond measure Follow Up Flag:Follow up Flag Status:Flagged June 27, 2016 To: Mayor Vazquez and City Council RE: 6/28/16 agenda item 8-A In addition to the reasons that the majority of the Board of Friends of Sunset Park opposes the City supporting this measure – I have another thought. I find myself now a senior on a fixed income. There comes a point where you cannot squeeze blood from a turnip! That is where many seniors are “at” to remain living in Santa Monica. There is no exemption for seniors. If however, that is the goal of the College and Council then go for it! Have the seniors leave the area. But please keep in mind that with each increase in taxes, seniors are forced to sell/move from the city. Thank you for your consideration, Jane Dempsey 8.STAFF ADMINISTRATIVE ITEMS A. Consideration of a proposal by Santa Monica College for a potential November 2016 bond measure that would include funding for joint projects between the College and the City of Santa Monica Recommended Action Staff recommends that the City Council consider supporting Santa Monica College's proposal for a potential bond measure on the November 2016 ballot that would include partial funding for the expansion of Memorial Park, adopt a motion in support of the bond, and direct staff to work in partnership with College representatives to define terms of the bond and associated future legal agreements between the City and the College. ***************************************************************** While the FOSP Board understands that the Council might favor having Santa Monica College fund the expansion of Memorial Park, and while we realize that the proposed SMC facilities bond a majority of the FOSP Board members urge the measure will probably pass in November 2016, City Council not to support this type of SMC bond funded joint project with SMC and not to support the proposed SMC bond measure. While supporting public education, park expansion, and additional sports field in the city, the FOSP Board is concerned that the proposed SMC facilities bond measure on the November ballot will obligate Santa Monica and Malibu property owners for another $295 or $345 million in college bonds. These would probably cost between $600 and $700 million to pay off. 1 Add to 8-A 06/28/2016 Santa Monica and Malibu property owners are already obligated for $613 million in SMC facility bonds from previous bond measures, which will probably cost about $1.2 billion to pay off. We imagine that SMC will be able to pass the bond measure in November, as their polling shows strong support, and they've been waging a full-court press PR effort all this year in support of the college. However, it seems unfair for the City Council to support a measure that will result in an additional $345 million in debt for not only Santa Monica property owners, but also Malibu property owners, all in return for a few women’s softball fields and soccer fields at Memorial Park, which SMC will undoubtedly claim it has priority to use. Where is the proportional community benefit for Santa Monica and Malibu residents in return for the $345 million bond indebtedness? SMC was able to raise about $468,000 in 2008 to pass its last bond measure, financed almost entirely by donations from the SMC Foundation (whoever that includes), the KCRW Foundation (whoever that includes), the Associated Students, and a series of architectural and construction firms and a law firm that have all profited from working on SMC construction projects. While residents probably cannot raise $500,000 to fund a campaign opposing the next SMC bond measure in November 2016, the FOSP Board hopes that the City Council will not lend support to we urge the City Council not to support this type of SMC the college in this endeavor. Again, bond funded joint project with SMC and not to support the proposed SMC bond measure. 2 Add to 8-A 06/28/2016 Anne Samartha From:Dan Kolhoff <dankolhoff@yahoo.com> Sent:Tuesday, June 28, 2016 10:10 AM To:Council Mailbox; Clerk Mailbox; Kevin McKeown Fwd; Tony Vazquez; Gleam Davis; Sue Himmelrich; Pam OConnor; Terry OÔDay; Ted Winterer; Rick Cole; martin.pastucka@smgov.net Subject:SMC BOND - Agenda item 8-A Follow up Follow Up Flag: Flag Status:Flagged Dear City Council Members, As a resident and someone you have sworn to represent, I ask that you do not support another bond for SMC. The burden this loan to SMC places on the local residents is extremely high for the minuscule benefit that is received. Many of us are negatively impacted on a daily basis by further expansion of the college into all parts of Santa Monica. And giving SMC priority over field space that the City was supposed to pay for because now SMC will pay for it with the Bond, is not acceptable. It's already insulting that families whose children play baseball, softball, soccer, etc. at Memorial Park have to pay extra money (and fines from tickets) for parking meters that have overrun the streets around the park along with the ridiculously short amount of time allowed for parking. Families can be at the park 4+ hours to support their children at the field and meters next to the park allow for 3 hours max. To support this Bond by letting someone else pay for what is the responsibility of the City of Santa Monica is unacceptable and another slap in the face to the families and children that rely on city parks. Thank you, Dan Kolhoff 3 Add to 8-A 06/28/2016 Anne Samartha From:Lorraine Sanchez <ms.lorraine.sanchez@gmail.com> Sent:Tuesday, June 28, 2016 10:33 AM To:Council Mailbox; Clerk Mailbox; Kevin McKeown Fwd; Tony Vazquez; Gleam Davis; Sue Himmelrich; Pam OConnor; Terry OÔDay; Ted Winterer; Rick Cole; martin.pastucka@smgov.net Subject:Proposed SMC bond measure Follow up Follow Up Flag: Flag Status:Flagged It seems that because we residents of Santa Monica have always supported the improvement and expansion of Santa Monica College, there should be no limits on our support, but for me the time has come to set some limits on it's continued growth and concurrent costs so I do not support another bond measure. There are 70 acres at West Los Angeles City College that could use development. I do realize that compared to the size of city government, the number of businesses, employees, tourists,and visitors,we residents, especially home owners are tiny in numbers but we did elect you to represent us and we are not asking you to do something that is morally wrong, so please hold off on supporting more debt/ "investment " for the college. Sincerely, Lorraine Sanchez 1947 19th st Santa Monica 4