Item 6 Staff Report Consider Proposed 2001-2006 Redevelopment Agency BudgetCOUNCIL AGENDA REPORT
DATE: MAY 17, 2001
TO: MAYOR AND TOWN COUNCIL
FROM: TOWN MANAGER
R
SUBJECT:
MEETING DATE: 5/21/01
ITEM NO. r
CONSIDER PROPOSED 2001-2006 REDEVELOPMENT AGENCY
BUDGET
RECOMMENDATION:
1. Open and hold the public hearing
2. Close the public hearing
3. Consider the proposed 2001-2006 Redevelopment Agency budget and provide staff with
direction on preparing the final budget
DISCUSSION:
Attached to this report is the Town Manager's transmittal letter and the Proposed 2001-2006
Redevelopment Agency budget.
Attachment: Proposed 2001-2006 Redevelopment Agency budget
PREPARED BY: DEBRA J. FIGONE
Town Manager
DJF:pg
MGR190 A:\cnclrpts15-21RDABudget.wpd
Reviewed by: Attorney w Finance Revised: 5/17/01 4:43 pm
Reformatted: 7/14/99
THE LOS GATOS
REDEVELOPMENT
AGENCY
PROPOSED
2001 -2006
BUDGET
THE LOS GATOS
REDEVELOPMENT
AGENCY
PROPOSED
Budget
for
Fiscal Year July 1, 2001 to June 30, 2006
Town Council
Joseph Pirzynski Mayor
Randy Attaway Vice Mayor
Steve Blanton Council Member
Sandy Decker Council Member
Steven Glickman Council Member
Submitted to the Town Council by:
Debra J. Figone Town Manager
Prepared by:
Jim Dale Finance Director
James Piper .... Assistant Town Manager
Stephen Conway Finance &
Administrative Services Director
The Los Gatos
Redevelopment Agency
Fiscal Year 2001-06
Proposed
Redevelopment Agency Budget
Page
Table of Contents
i-v
Budget Message
Tab 1
Schedule One - Summary Source & Use - All Funds
1-1
Tab 2
Schedule Two - Sources & Use of Funds - Central Project Area
2-1
Tab 3 3-1
Schedule Three - Project Summary - Central Project Area
Tab 4 4-1
Schedule Four - Sources & Use of Funds - Housing Set Aside
Tab 5 5-1
Schedule Five - Project Summary - Housing Set Aside
Tab 6 6-1
Project Worksheets
Tab 7 7-1
Attachments
TowN OF Los GATOS
REDEVELOPMENT AGENCY
(408) 354-6832
FAX: (408) 399-5786
May 16, 2001
Honorable Chair and Members of the Redevelopment Agency
I am very pleased to submit to you the Proposed 2001-06 Los Gatos Redevelo
During the last year, the members of the Redevelopment Agency (RDA) h ..
to review and update the RDA's original 1991 Implementation Plan and cons
strategies to accomplish the revised $18.0 million list of capital projects revia
June 5, 2000 (Attachment 1). As noted at the time, this $18.0 million figure
Agency's current financial ability to pursue all of these projects now, rather i
total capacity over its 32 year remaining life to accomplish projects with a
dollars) of $18.0 million. Additionally, the priorities were not set among t E
As was discussed during these meetings, the Agency would need to pursue a - _I
issuance to accomplish these projects. Ms. Emily Wagner, the Town's Finan
that an initial issuance of approximately $5.0 million currently could be p �—
Agency's financial history and the amount of net available tax increment thielmonsommtotm. -um
debt service payments. Redevelopment Agencies are prohibited from issuii _
fewer than 20 years of remaining life, so the Los Gatos Agency will need AMC
intended amount of debt by 2012. Since the RDA will have to issue its deb -
between now and 2012, it is important that the Agency begin now to focus it
to ensure timely arrangement of the needed financing.
Following the June meeting, the Agency was advised that the Santa Clara Co --
had provided updated assessed valuation figures for the Agency, and that
information, the $18.0 million figure could be increased to $25.2 million.
however, at this time revised the capital projects list to reflect this updated 3 -
Overview of the Proposed 2001-02 RDA Budget
The financial information presented in this document is a five year plan for
only the revenue and expenditures numbers for fiscal year 2001-02 are at -1.1=
Agency when the budget is approved. Schedule 1 presents a comprehei
proposed budget by identifying the total source and use of funds available to t
02 source of funds comes primarily from the $3,066,600 in tax incremer
Agency for next year. The calculation of the tax increment, as well as
retained by other taxing jurisdictions at the formation of the Agency, is sho"
INCORPORATED AUGUST 10, 1887
These funds are then allocated to support activities in two primary categories or "uses" - the Los
Gatos Central Project Area and the Housing Set Aside Program. Each of these two primary uses will
be described separately.
Los Gatos Central Project Area
Schedule 2 provides the next level of detail concerning the source and use of funds within that
portion of the Agency known as the Central Project Area. Within the Source area of Schedule 2 it
should be noted that a legally required deduction of 20% is made from the tax increment revenue to
provide funding for the Agency's Housing Set Aside Program. The Use section of Schedule 2 shows
how the funds available to the Central Project Area are expended. For 200 l -02 the three main
categories are:
Administration & Debt Service
Pass Through Agreements
Capital Protects:
Street & Signals Program
Public Facilities Program
Parks Program
Total Use
$ 642,800
$ 816,220
$ 2.670,000
$ 475,000
$ 728,900
$ 5,332,920
It should be noted that the fund balance displayed on Schedule 2 for June 30, 2002, indicates a
potential deficit of $637,049, however, given the two year implementation schedule for the majority
of the 2001-02 projects, it is unlikely that this potential deficit will occur. Staff will monitor this
situation closely during the fiscal year, and should circumstances arise that could result in a deficit
situation, staff will bring to the Agency a plan to provide interim financing until sufficient tax
increment revenues are collected to eliminate the deficit condition. Schedule 2 projects that tax
increment revenues would be sufficient in 2002-03 to retire the potential gap financing.
Schedule 3 presents a break down of the $642,800 mentioned above for Administration & Debt
Service. It is composed of $313,700 for the Business Services charge which is the amount paid by
the Agency to the Town for administrative support and overhead charges and $76,500 listed as
Administration for a portion of the 1.25 FTE staff to be paid directly by the Agency.
For the last several years the Agency has budgeted a Housing Coordinator position (1.0 FTE),
however, the position has not been filled. The Proposed 2001-02 RDA Budget reflects a 50% re-
allocation of this position to the Central District and retains the remaining 50°A in the Housing Set
Aside Program. This position will provide critical staff needed to proactively manage redevelopment
and housing program activity that is expected to increase as the tax increment revenues grow. As
mentioned earlier, the Agency sunsets in 2032, when all outstanding debt must be retired. There is
effectively a 10 year window of time remaining for the Agency to make its funding decisions and
secure its long term financing. The proposed position also would have day to day responsibility for
implementing the General Plan direction to ensure the Town's economic vitality. Work time spent
in this area unrelated to the Agency would be reimbursed by the Town's General Fund. The
reimbursement amount and related details will be defined once the position is on board and a
workplan is developed for the Town's Economic Vitality program.
ii
The Central Project Area includes a portion of the Administrative Analyst (.25 FTE) assigned to the
Community Development Department. Given the level of activity planned for the Agency during
the 2001-02 fiscal year, it is expected that the both of these positions will be filled and actively
engaged in Agency work.
The $816,220 listed on Schedule 3 as Agreements with Taxing Entities represents the payments that
are made by the Agency in accordance with the "pass through" agreements that were made between
the Agency and other taxing jurisdictions when the Agency was established. Attachment 3 provides
the details of these payments and how they are calculated.
The $145,000 shown on Schedule 3 as Debt Service - Principal and the $107,600 listed as Interest
Expense equal $252,600 which is the amount of debt service due in 2001-02 for the repayment of
the Certificates of Participation issued to a number of years ago to construct the downtown parking
structure at Lot #4. The debt service schedule for these payments is found in Attachment 3.
The remainder of Schedule 3 lists the 2001-06 proposed projects under each program area. As with
the Preliminary 2001-06 Capital Improvements Program, a detailed Project Worksheet is provided
in Schedule 6 for each of the projects. Below is a list and proposed budget for each of these projects:
North Santa Cruz Ave/Bachman/Grays Lane Improvements
Street Improvements
Parking Structure Design (on hold)
Town Plaza Improvements
$1,560,000
$1,110, 000
$ 475,000
$ 728,900
It should be noted that the $1,560,000 for the North Santa Cruz improvements listed above does not
include funds for the resurfacing ofNorth Santa Cruz, however, the proposed five year RDA funding
of $2,460,000 for street improvements is projected to be sufficient to improve all of the eligible
streets within the Agency, including North Santa Cruz.
One item that is currently under review by the Agency is the issue of alley maintenance. There are
a number of alleys within the Agency's boundaries that need surface and drainage improvements.
At this time, no funding has been allocated for these improvements, however, staff is evaluating the
extent of work necessary to improve the alleys to an acceptable standard and will review this
information, along with the policy issues related to alley maintenance, and report to the Agency in
September.
Housing Set Aside Program
The Redevelopment Agency is required to set aside 20% of the total tax increment revenue for
increasing or expanding the supply of very low and low income housing in the community. The
Agency must cause the construction of low and moderate income housing units equivalent to 15%
of the number of market rate units built within the project area. Forty-five market rate units have
been constructed in the RDA project area. Based on this number, the Agency is required to have
seven units for low and moderate income families with three of the units for very low income
families. A total of six Town Below Market Price (BMP) Program units have been built in the
project area which are for low and moderate income families. No units have been built for very low
income families. Therefore, the Agency needs three very low income units to meet our obligation
under the program. The twelve units that have been constructed by Community Housing Developers
(CHD) will exceed the Agency's current requirement for very low income units and will provide a
credit of 9 units for meeting future affordable housing requirements.
Community Redevelopment Law (CRL) recognizes that it is necessary for an agency to amass funds
in excess of $500,000 before it can efficiently and effectively participate in an affordable housing
development. However, the CRL has established strict regulations to address the perception that,
collectively, redevelopment agencies are not spending their housing set -aside money quickly enough.
The Agency will have an excess surplus when the unexpended and unencumbered amount in the
Agency's Housing Fund exceeds the greater of $1,000,000 or the total amount deposited in the
Agency's Housing Fund during the preceding four years. The Agency has three years to expend or
encumber the excess or voluntarily disburse that surplus amount to the county housing authority or
other public agency exercising housing development powers within the project area. CRL prohibits
a noncompliant agency from undertaking new non -housing activities until the excess surplus has
been expended or encumbered and requires additional affordable housing expenditures using non -
Housing Fund money. The following provides a six year analysis of the Agency's excess surplus:
2000-01 2001-02 2002-03 2003-04 2004-05 2005-06
Beginning Fund Balance 1,007,500 1,240,400 1,334,900 1,783,200 2,283,835 2,842,115
Annual Revenue 593,900 598,900 668,380 737,800 812,740 892,620
Annual Expenditures 111,000 194,400 220,080 237,165 254,460 271,980
Affordable Housing Grants 250,000 310,000
Year End Fund Balance 1,240,400 1,334,900 1,783,200 2,283,835 2,842,115 3,462,755
Prior 4 Years Revenue 1,187,054 1,607,076 2,101,756 2,502,402 2,885,700 3,261,200
Maximum Excess Allowable 1,187,054 1,607,076 2,101,756 2,502,402 2,885,700 3,261,200
Margin (53,346) 272,176 318,556 218,567 43,585 (201, 555)
It should be noted that at the end of fiscal year 2000-01 the Housing Set Aside Program anticipates
exceeding the allowable margin by $53,346 which triggers the three year period during the Agency
must obligate sufficient funds to address the surplus condition. As shown above, the Agency is
projected to have addressed this requirement by committing sufficient funds to meet its housing
obligations. It is important that the Agency ensure sufficient use of these funds during 2001-02 to
avoid another year with a surplus condition. Ending a third year in a surplus condition would result
in the Agency being required to disperse the surplus funds to the County Housing Authority. A study
session will be set for this Fall to discuss the Town's approach to affordable housing and Council's
policy interests in this area.
Schedule 4 presents an overview of the Source and Use information for the Housing Set Aside
Program. As mentioned earlier, the Tax Increment amount shown in the Source portion of the
schedule represents the required 20% allocation from the Agency for the provision of housing.
Schedule 5 presents the detailed use of funds within the Housing Set Aside Program. It reflects
expenses of $79,000 for Business Services, Administration that includes the expenses for the
remaining 50% portion of the full-time RDA staff member and associated materials, supplies, and
iv
equipment costs. Schedule 5 also includes expenses for Affordable Housing Grants ($3 10,000).
Although no final decisions have been made concerning the award of these grants for 2001-02, it is
anticipated that one or more projects will be funded in the next fiscal year. It should be noted that
the amount shown for 2000-01 under this category represents the $250.000 contribution to the
Silicon Valley Housing Trust that the Agency approved earlier this year.
Conclusion
The Proposed 2001-06 RDA Budget provides a program of improvements to continue the Downtown
Streetscape/Beautification improvements, street improvements, and the renovation of Plaza Park.
As with the Capital Improvements Program, it is envisioned that these improvements will be
implemented during the next two years, although work would begin during the 2001-02 fiscal year.
As was mentioned in the Preliminary 2001-06 Capital Improvements Program, there are several
studies planned for 2001-02 to assess the current condition of the Town's and Agency's physical
infrastructure. These studies including the Parking Management study, the Civic Center and Library
Master Plans, and an Infrastructure Needs Assessment will assist both the Town and the Agency in
setting funding priorities in the future.
Respectfully submitted,
Debra J. igori
Executive Director
v
0
n
I
0
so
SCHEDULE ONE
LOL —ATOS REDEVELOPMENT AGENCY FY 2001-_406
- Sources and Use of Funds -
Budgeted I Estimated
SOURCE 2000-01 2000-01 2001-02
2002-03 2003-04 2004-05 2005-06
I
Fund Balance July 1 $1,153,800 $1,557,841 $2,970,241
$710,271 $2,228,757 $3,803,142 $5,598,021
Interest Income $57,700
$230,000
$75,000
$92,700
$136,000 $198,000 $244,500
Tax Increment Revenue
1,879,500
2,832,300
3,066,600
3,310,300
3,563,700
3,827,200 4,101,300
SB813 - 5% Growth
304,500
415,000
435,750
457,538
478,000 l 504,000 529,000
Contribution i 0
63,000
0
0
0I 0 0
TOTAL SOURCE $3,395,500
$5,098,141
$6,547,591 $4,570,809 $6,406,457 $8,332,342 $10,472,821
USE
Los Gatos Central Project Area 2,850,000
1,766,900 5,332,920
2,135,700
2,384,795
2,503,360 2,619,690
Housing Set Aside Program 475,500
361,000 504,400
206,352
218,520
230,961 243,693
TOTAL USE $3,325,500_,
$2,127,900 $5,837,320
$2,342,052
$2,603,315
$2,734,321 ' $2,863,383
FUND BALANCE JUNE 30 $70,000
$2,970,241
$710,271
$2,228,757 $3,803,142 $5,598,021 ', $7,609,438
1-1
n
o
e
SCHEDULE TWO
CENTRAL LOS GATOS REDEVELOPMENT PROJECT AREA FY 2001-2006
Fund 930 - Central District
-Schedule of Sources and Use of Funds -
Budgeted
Estimated
SOURCE 2000-01
2000-01 2001-02 2002-03 2003-04 2004-05 2005-06
Fund Balance July 1 $146,300 $550,341 $1,729,841 ($637.049) $419,409 $1,474,514 $2,687,614
Interest Income 7,300 160,0004 15,000 45,000 56,500
:
Tax Increment Revenue
1,879,500
2,832,300
3,066,600 3,310,300
3,563,700 ; 3,827,200 4,101,300
SB813 - 5% Growth
304,500
415,000
435,750 457,538
478,000
504,000 529,000
Less Housing Set Aside @ 20%
(436,800)
(523,900)
(536,320)1 (575,680)
(616,800)
(659,740)1 (704,620)
Contribution (Toll House)
63,000
j
TOTAL SOURCE
$1,900,800
$3,496,741 $4,695,871 $2,555,109
$3,859,309 $5,190,974 $6,669,794
USE
Administration & Debt Service
625,400
683,200
642,800
725,500
751,595
782,990' 808,820
Pass Through - Agreements
583,700
583,700
816,220
960,200
1,183,200
1,270,370 L 360,870
Capital Projects:
Street and Signal Program
2,670,000
450,000
450,000 I
450,000 1 450,000
Public Facilities Program
475,000
475,000
l
Parks Program
665,900
728,900
Storm Drainage Program
500,000
500,000
TOTAL USE i $2,850,000
$1,766,900 $5,332,920
$2,135,700
$2,384,795
$2,503,360 $2,619,690
FUND BALANCE JUNE 30 ! ($949,200)
$1,729,841 ($637,049)
$419,409
$1,474,514 $2,687,614 $4,050,104
2-1
[ ) n
o
•
SCHEDULE THREE
CENTRAL LOS GATOS REDEVELOPMENT PROJECT AREA FY 2001-2006
Fund 930 -Central District
-Project Summary -
Budgeted
Estimated
PROJECTS 2000-01
2000.01
2001-02
2002-03 2003-04 2004-05 2005-06
PROJECT ADMINISTRATION
Business Services
327,600
432,000
313,700
395,100 414,795 ; 440,790 466,320
Administration
76,500
80,400 j 85,000 I 89,200 94,000
Agreements w/Taxing Entities j 583,700
583,700
816,220
960,200 11,183,200 1,270,370 1,360,870
Debt Service -Principal 135,000
135,000
145,000
150,000 160,000 ; 170,000 175.000
Interest Expense
162,800
116,200
107,600
100,000 I 91,800 83,000 ' 73,500
1
STREET & SIGNAL PROJECTS I
450,000
Street/Sidewalk SC/&Bachmn
1,560,000
Street Improvement
1,110,000
450,000 j 450,000 ; 450,000
PUBLIC FACILITIES
Parking Structure
475,000
475,000
PARKS PROGRAM
Town Plaza
665,900
728,900
STORM DRAINAGE PROJECTS
Hernandez Avenue & Massol/Tait
500,000
500,000
TOTAL USE OF FUNDS $2,850,000 $1,766,900 $5,332,920 $2,135,700 $2,384,795 $2,503,360 $2,619,690
3-1
n n
r)
0
•
SCHEDULE FOUR
REDEVELOPMENT AGENCY HOUSING FUND 2001-2006
Fund 960 - Housina Set Aside
-Schedut of Sources and Use of Funds-
_
I Budgeted
Estimated
2002-03
2005-06
SOURCE
2000-01
2000-01
2001-02
2003-04
2004-05
Fund Balance July 1
$1,007.500
$1,007,500
$1,240,400 $1,347,320
$1,809,348
$2,328,628
$2,910,407
75,000 92,700
188,000
Interest Income
! 50,400
70,000
! 121,000
153,000,
Tax Increment Revenue
436,800
523,900
I 536,320 575,680
; 616,800 !
659,740T
704,620
TOTAL SOURCE
$1,494,700
$1,601,400
$1,851,720
$2,015,700
$2,547,148
$3,141,368
$3,803,027
� 1
105,693
138,000
USE
Business Services @ 9-15%
65,500
79,000
79,400
86,352
92,520
98,961
Administration -Planning
100,000
32,000
115,000
120,000
126,000
132,000
Affordable Housing Grants
L 310,000
250,000
310,000
TOTAL USE
3475,500 1
$361,000
$504,400
$206,352
$218,520
3230961
$243,693
FUND BALANCE JUNE 30
$1,019,200 $1,240,400
$1,347,320
$1,809,348
$2,328,628
$2,910,407
$3,559,334
4-1
r)
0
e
SCHEDULE FIVE
REDEVELOPMENT AGENCY HOUSING FUND 2001-2006
Fund 960 - Housina Set Aside
-Project Summary -
Budgeted Estimated
2005-06
PROJECTS 2000-01 2000-01
2001-02
2002-03
2003-04
2004-05
Business Services @ 9-15%
65,500 79,000
79,400 !
99,300 I
106,905
; 114,810
; 123,030
7 138,000
Administration -Planning
100,000 32,000
115,000 I
120,000 '
126,000
' 132,000
Affordable Housing Grants
310,000 250,000
310,000
I
TOTAL USE
$475,500 $361,000
$504,400
$219,300
$232,905
$246,810
$261,030
5-1
n 0
0
0
DO .r NTOWN BEAUTIFICATION IMPROVEMENTS
Streets & Signals
Capital Program Category:
Project Schedule:
v
O
Uots
U
0
U
Project Status:
Parks & Public Works
Responsible Department:
Director of Parks & Public Works
Project Manager:
C
�'� • o)aUcd U 'C +.
CA CI y O O U
a) y at 0 C '= U
w C G 2 •_° >> i.•
c.,)= a' U az, y
> cn • • a co 2
> 0 .2 3 0 •� U
o O. ct U cb cC
a.E o [ o c
03 C c 3 . 'A ti
- > .o O
• �Qo.N z
a
a- ›,>.o .ra'c
co a) c C L 0
y y •> O a.)
o cd" C > C 04 C
co
c..)U
y Q O
C Y N
C 7C � a)
4.1 C�a c
o�:U•2• O
u6. U
C cu co ., U
b4 to
c▪ a - ca ct 4) c b
C C. C/1 o h a y tij 0
3 .S 0 >, - o �.
2 i 3 rr`.� • = (I a.
C 0 V 8 Q. y
- > )• a� - o .b
3 "_ U U
•
ti Q N U 40= _ CI
U = .O U .D 3 E
a>) 1,-. i U w >
y U C v a)
'O Mi L. RJ" O C U
C = -a E u .0
4- y > Q
34° ° cu cn
c
U 2 1-4 > G U
•co o a . a Y .c a)
Yeu ..2C�c >>
yf fl_ ^ a) Q
.CU
Project Description:
6-1
Community Design Implementation Strategy 4.14.
General Plan Consistency:
Environmental Determination:
a
cd
O
U
U
O
an
v O
Ro
E
+' N
U W
5 Yr. Total
U
U a0) O
v O
T) O
Cd N
0 0 O O O
H9 V) v9 6,
6A
EA
6A
USE OF FUNDS
Construction
b4
69
sR
S1 I.LET IMPROVEMENTS
Streets & Signals
Capital Program Category:
Project Schedule:
Project Status:
Parks & Public Works
Responsible Department:
Director of Parks & Public Works
Project Manager:
10 > ▪ a) dA 0
6.� o�F�•
UUh
.�
a) O H $ E
�UA.1e) 03
3 C o Q. um ca, 0 5.
p 3 ti U
1� Er C 4. U en
� 4.)—� c o
00 ii - N Ey
C i. W
O a4 A ' c > vz1 O
a" _❑ +� ct 0 Cl.) C • 0
d4 Ir bA ++ A
t.
U -00 Q 0 co • 00
426, N P. L =
CG r. ed ° a" c. • =
▪ c y 4.73
6,2 L" > W ."- 10 4. Lr
O cd W m., U CI
0° o a 2 • 0
`� CC Cs �� 0. • is.
C > yA'0 a) y a.ci) 0
.0 y C) O 0 > 0
p -8 ..p ,• )
a • 4 c� 0 -0 a a
C F. ti> .0 y U U
'S 2 id c'3 .2 5 w
C iz. q o co U ct 0
++ 6 Zi ••E O G 1 .3 W
Qp ) bphg
0 C"O.ti 0
N . .v° U '0 '
, CE E 2 3 E
8
Project Description:
6-2
Transportation Element Policies 1.2 and 1.4.
a
0
•
cC
O
U
0
cis
0
4-4
:d
1
n.
0
0 4
00
Cd
U
0
a)
S..
Environmental Determination:
5 Yr. Total
-r
00 0 0 0
O O O O.
0 N M
- fA
tri
O O O O
N Evt M
O
O
O
O
O
0
0
O
N
• 0
r0
O
� N
SOURCE OF FUNDS
O
V'1
O
1
O
O
O
0
b▪ 4
O
O
O
0
O
O
O
0
USE OF FUNDS
Construction
O
O
O
0
--7
O
O
O
0
6A
Public Facilities
Capital Program Category:
Design: On hold pending completion of Downtown Parking Management Plan
Project Schedule:
Project Status:
Parks & Public Works
Responsible Department:
Director of Parks & Public Works
Project Manager:
0
c
F .0 U E- E-. G.
Project Description:
General Plan Consistency:
Environmental Determination:
6-3
SOURCE OF FUNDS
2005-06 5 Yr. Total
O O O O
O O O O
t, tri
EA EA V EA
VI
0
a
USE OF FUNDS
kr,
vj
6A
tic
N
K
EA
TOWN PLAZA RENOVATION
Capital Program Category:
Project Schedule:
0
O
y
6.1
ct1
a~
5
0
.O
0
y
Cr
0.0
N
..o
0
cu
U
O
O y
U
•
Project Status:
Parks & Public Works
Responsible Department:
Director of Parks & Public Works
Project Manager:
Project Description:
Community Design Element Implementing Strategy 4.14.
General Plan Consistency:
a
U
4-
0
•
CC
O
0
0
0
0
eel
a
5
a)
W
0
1
0
e0
O.
G. O "
F L7
Environmental Determination:
6-4
SOURCE OF FUNDS
00
r
6A
TOTAL SOURCE
USE OF FUNDS
619
b9
o N VD a
N
N r
ER
Construction
0
•
Redevelopment Capital Projects
Downtown Beautification Improvements
- Santa Cruz/Bachman Intersection
- Main/University Intersection
- Grays Lane Improvements
- Plaza Park Improvements
- Santa Cruz/Wood Road Traffic Circle
Streets/Sidewalks
- All asphalt streets in project area
- Santa Cruz Avenue (from Main to Highway 9)
Storm Drains
- Hernandez, Massol/Tait
- Santa Cruz Avenue (from Main to Bachman)
- Tait Avenue Trunk
- Santa Cruz/Roberts Trunk
- Pennsylvania Trunk
- Lyndon Avenue Box Culvert Replacement
Alleys
- Almond Grove Neighborhood Alleys
- Alleys located between Loma Alta and Johnson
S2,250,000
$3,765,000
S2,150,000
$ 200,000
Downtown Parking S6,500,000
Senior Center Capital Improvements $ 250,000
Library S2,885,000
TOTAL $18,000,000
Attachment 1
7-1
Revenue
We have assumed a 4% growth rate in the assessed value of property in the project area for each of the following
fiscal years with the exception of 2000-2001 (see table below). Redevelopment law provides that each entity
receiving tax revenue from the project area may elect to receive up to 2% growth in property tax revenues each year.
Some taxing jurisdictions elected to do so, while others did not. The last column shows the tax increment to the
agency after the adjustments for election amounts. The numbers in this table are conservative, as they do not
include increases in revenue due to new developments.
REDEVELOPMENT AGENCY REVENUE PROJECTION
FY 2000-2001 THROUGH 2005-2006
Election
Base Year Amount per $100
302,476,656
Calculate Increment Net
Incre-
Total AV ment Ave. Tax Lost Election $
Rate 1.035
2000/2001
2001/2002
2002/2003
2003/2004
2004/2005
2005/2006
$ 354,862,179
$ 361,959,423
$ 369,198,611
$ 376, 582, 583
$ 384,114,235
$ 391,796,520
FIVE YEAR TOTAL
Election Amounts
$ 52,385,523
$ 59,482,767
$ 66,721,955
$ 74,105,927
$ 81,637,579
$ 89,319,864
$ 523,855 $ 585,708,196
4%
$ 594,828 $ 609,137,148
4%
$ 667,220 $ 633,502,634
4%
$ 741,059 $ 658,842,739
4%
$ 816,376 $ 685,196,449
4%
$ 893,199 $ 712,604,307
$ 2,832,300
$ 3,066,600
$ 3,310,300
$ 3,563,700
$ 3,827,200
$ 4,101, 300
$ 2,493,209
$ 2,681,568
$ 2,878,409
$ 3,084,013
$ 3,298,760
$ 3,523,133
$17,959,092
Before the Redevelopment Plan was adopted, each affected taxing entity was given an opportunity to pass a
resolution requesting receipt of any increase in property taxes related to Proposition 13. The following table shows
the five agencies that passed an election resolution. Santa Clara County Controller's Office is responsible for
distributing the election amounts to the other agencies as presented below:
2000-01 2001-02 2002-03 2003-04 2004-05 2005-06
Election Amount $523,900 $594,800 $667,200 $741,100 $816,400 $ 893,200
Santa Clara County
Los Gatos High School
District
20.84% $109,180 $123,954 $139,044 $154,444 $170,136 $ 186,140
17.36% 90,950 103,260 115,830 128,655 141,725 155,060
Central Fire District 13.13% 68,785
Town of Los Gatos 12.04% 63,080
Mid Peninsula Open Space 1.36% 7,125
District
78,095
71,615
8,090
87,600
80,330
9,075
97,305 107,195 117,280
89,230 98,295
10,080 11,105
107,540
12,150
Election Amount to Other $339,120 $385,014 $431,879 $479,714 $528,456 $ 578,170
Agencies
Attachment 2
7-2
Pass Through Agreements with Other Taxing Entities
2001-02 through 2005-06
2000-01 2001-02 2002-03 2003-04 2004-05 2005-06
RDA YR9 RDA YR10 RDA YR11 RDA YR12 RDA YR13 RDA YR14
Source
Increment for Pass -Through Factor 2,832,300 3,066,600 3,310,300 3,563,700 3,827,200 4.101,300
SB 813 415,000 435,750 457,538 480,414 504,435 529.657
Sub -Total 3,247,300 3,502,350 3,767,838 4,044,114 4,331,635 4,630,957
Less: Lost Election Amount (339,120) (385,014) (431,879) (479,714) (528,456) (578,168)
Increment Available for Pass Through 2,908,180 3.117,336 3,335,959 3,564,400 3,803,179 4,052,789
Agreement
County Office of Education
Mid -Peninsula Open Space
West Valley College District
Los Gatos Elementary (last yr 2012)
Los Gatos Elementary (last yr 2027)
Los Gatos Elementary (last yr 2012)
Source
Election Amount
0.291%
0.544%
0.726%
2.316%
8,463
15,820
21,113
9,071
16,958
22,632
9,708
18,148
24,219
77,261
10,372
19,390
25,878
82,552
11,067
20,689
27,611
88,082
11,794
22,047
29,423
93,863
523,900 594,800 667.200 741,100 816,400 893,200
Agreement
County Office of Education 2.910% 15,245 17,309 19,416 21,566 23,757 25,992
Los Gatos Elementary 23.160% 121,335 137,756 154,524 171,639 189,078 206,865
Source
Increment for Pass -through & SB 813 3,247,300 3,502,350 3,767,838 4,044,114 4,331,635 4,630,957
Less Election Amounts:
Town of Los Gatos (63,080) (71,615) (80,330) (89,230) (98,295) (107,540)
Mid Peninsula Open Space (7,125) (8,090) (9,075) (10,080) (11,105) (12,150)
Santa Clara County (109,180) (123,954) (139,044) (154,444) (170,136) (186,140)
Fire Distnct (68,785) (78,095) (87,600) (97,305) (107,195) (117,280)
Los Gatos High Sch000l District (90,950) (103,260) (115,830) (128,655) (141,725) (155,060)
Less: 20% Housing Set Aside (498,640) (536,320) (575,680) (616,800) (659,740) (704,620)
2.409,540 2,581,016 2,760,279 2,947,600 3,143,439 3,348,167
Agreement
Los Gatos High School District 17.360% 418,296 448,064 479,184 511,703 545,701 581,242
Source
Election Amount
Agreement
West Valley College District
Source
Increment for Pass -through & SB 813
Election Amount Retained
Less Election Amount
523,900 594.800 667,200 741,100 816,400 893,200
5.800% 30,386 34,498 38,698 42,984 47,351 51,806
3,247,300 3,502,350 3,767,838 4,044,114 4,331,635 4,630,957
184,780 209,786 235,321 261,386 287,944 315,032
(523,900) (594.800) (667,200) (741,100) (816,400) (893,200)
2,908,180 3,117,336 3,335,959 3.564,400 3,803,179 4,052,789
Agreement
Santa Clara County 4.168% 121,213 129,931 139,043
Santa Clara County (last year 2008) 8.336% 297,128 317,033 337,840
Santa Clara County (last year 2017) 12.504%
Santa Clara County (last year 2032) 16.672%
Total Pass Through Owed by FY 751,873 816,219 960,199 1,183,212 1,270,370 1,360,872
Attachment 3
7-3
DEBT SERVICE
The Agency is responsible for paying the Certificate of Participation that were issued for Parking Lot
4 located between Elm Street and Grays Lane. Following is a table of the outstanding debt and due
dates:
Payment Date Principal Interest Total
2001 135,000 116,186 251,186
2002 145,000 107,580 252,580
2003 150,000 99,895 249,895
2004 160,000 91,795 251,795
2005 170,000 82,995 252,995
2006 175,000 73,475 248,475
2007 185,000 63,500 248,500
2008 195,000 54,250 249,250
2009 205,000 44,500 249,500
2010 215,000 34,250 249,250
2011 230,000 23,500 253,500
2012 240,000 12,000 252,000
Total $ 2,205,000 $ 803,926 $ 3,008,926
Attachment 4
7-4
Town Council Minutes May 21, 2001
Redevelopment Agency Los Gatos, California
PUBLIC HEARING CONTINUED
PRELIMINARY 2001-2002 OPERATING BUDGET CONT.
PUBLIC TESTIMONY CONCERNING GRANT REQUESTS
Pat Lake, 208 E. Main St, introduced Denise Leffers, 18400 Overlook Road, 012, as the new
executive director of Teen & Family Counceling Center. They spoke about senior services and teen
services, and explained how the program helped teenagers and their families make positive changes
in their lives. Guidance and support is given through individual and group counseling and work with
parenting. They strive to not duplicate services but support other agencies in meeting the needs of
their clients.
Ray Davis, spoke about government and land use policies as they relate to the General Plan and
mentioned the Attorney and his work.
Mari Ellen Reynolds, 750 Curtner Ave, Second harvest Food Bank, noted that the agency is now
over 25 years old and thanked Council for the continued support of the Town.
Deborah Kranefuss, 1199 Arroyo Seco Drive, Campbell, representing Live Oak Senior Nutrition and
Service Center, spoke of the move to a more convenient and larger site for the seniors. upstairs at the
same location.
Anne Dunham, 296 Garden Hill Drive, Youth Science Institute, thanked Council for its investment
in this organization and noted that the support from the Town gives leverage in seeking additional
funding. She spoke of a new center that will have a ground breaking this year and requested the full
$2,000 funding request.
Motion by Mr. Blanton, seconded by Mr. Glickman, to close the public hearing. Carried
unanimously.
PUBLIC HEARING
PRELIMINARY 2001-2006 REDEVELOPMENT AGENCY BUDGET/HEARING (06.09 & 38)
Mayor Pirzynski stated that this was the time and place duly noted to hold public hearing to consider
Preliminary 2001-2006 Redevelopment Agency Budget.
OVERVIEW OF REDEVELOPMENT AGENCY/REVENUES/EXPENDITURES
Town Manager, Debra Figone presented an overview of this agency's budget history. She explained
that the agency was formed as a forty year agency and it now has thirty-one years left. The final
decisions have not yet been made for the expenditure of redevelopment funds. The needs and interests
revolve around a new Library, Civic Center refurbishing and a comprehensive street maintenance
program. The agency will not have the capability to bond after twenty years expire, therefore a
determination of projects and funding mechanisms must be established in the next few years to leave
time for implementation of bonds before the time expires. There is a present need for 18 million to
carry out the contemplated projects. Revenue to be received from the agency over time is estimated
to be 17.5 million.
Housing Set -Aside funds was discussed and state law governing the funds was noted. If those funds
exceed 1 million the State can appropriate the funds and give them to the County Housing Authority.
The Town gave 250 thousand to the Silicon Valley Trust Fund in 2000-01 and 2001-02. Within the
next three years, and according to the guidelines of the state and county, 310 thousand will be
available for use within Los Gatos. A study session on housing will be agendized.
TC:D13:MM032101
5
Town Council Minutes May 21, 2001
Redevelopment Agency Los Gatos, California
PUBLIC HEARING CONTINUED
PRELIMINARY 2001-2006 REDEVELOPMENT AGENCY BUDGET/CONT.
Council Comments:
Mr. Glickman suggested using a portion of the CDBG housing funds to assist the needs of the Miles
Ave. project. He noted that housing set aside fees are collected for this program as the staff offers
business services to contractors and builders. He suggested that the Town charge its services against
the Agency.
Mr. Pirzynski noted that the Town would be hiring a housing coordinator, and would then be able
to move forward in determining and prioritizing the options for Council to consider concerning
housing set aside monies.
Motion by Mr. Glickman, seconded by Mr. Blanton, to close the public hearing. Carried
unanimously.
MINUTES OF MAY 7, 2001 (02.V)
Ray Davis, resident, asked that additional comments from the audience be included in the minutes,
and requested additional wording be included for the Hillbrook resolution regarding traffic review.
Mayor Pirzynski asked for the following amendments: 1) Page 9, Mr. Hernanadez' request for baby
changing stations should read as follows: (Baby stations and a place to sit with children can be
looked into as suggested by and Mr. Blanton.) 2) Page 6, Les White's report on the Town Plaza
should read as follows: (Les White, Interim Public Works Director, discussed the Town Plaza Park
Plans, noting that the bathrooms would remain optional at the Plaza; that there was sufficient funding
for the fountain design plans; that there was no funding for construction of the bathrooms; and
Council could decide after further consideration if it would like to include public facilities.)
Motion by Mr. Blanton, seconded by Mr. Glickman, that Council approve the Minutes of May 7,
2001, Town Council/Redevelopment Agency Meeting, as amended per Mr. Pirzynski's request above.
Carried unanimously.
STREET RESURFACING/PROJECT 0106/SLURRY SEAL/RESOLUTION 2001-53 (03.25)
Ray Davis, resident, asked about the street resurfacing and the use of slurry seal. He also requested
a street resurfacing schedule and notification schedule. (He was informed that the full five year plan
with delineated streets to be reconstructed, resurfaced, and maintained was on file in the Clerk's office
and had been before Council for approval and discussion on a prior Council meeting with full hearing
and input from various neighborhoods. Mr. White spoke of sharing information with the Chamber of
Commerce, mailing notices of intent, placing noticeable signage and using the Town website for
dispersal of street maintenance schedules.)
Motion by Mr. Attaway, seconded by Mr. Glickman, that Council adopt Resolution 2001-53
entitled, RESOLUTION OF THE TOWN OF LOS GATOS AWARDING A CONSTRUCTION
CONTRACT FOR PROJECT 0106 SURFACE (SLURRY) SEAL PROGRAM, and authorizing
staff to execute change orders to the construction contract up to an amount of $160,00. Carried
unanimously.
TC D 13:MM052101
6