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