Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAboutInfo Rprt - L&L Districts & Residential Dvlpmnts CITY OF PALM DESERT DEPARTMENT OF PUBLIC WORKS CITY COUNCIL STAFF REPORT REQUEST: RECEIVE AND FILE AN INFORMATIONAL REPORT REGARDING LANDSCAPE AND LIGHTING DISTRICTS AND RESIDENTIAL DEVELOPMENTS WITH NO COMMON AREA FUNDING MECHANISMS SUBMITTED BY: Mark Greenwood, P.E., Director of Public Works DATE: December 9, 2010 CONTENTS: Consolidated LLD Budget for FY 2010/11 Related Past City Council Minutes Recommendation By Minute Motion, receive and file informational report relating to the City's Landscape and Lighting Districts (LLD) and areas with no common area funding mechanism. Executive Summary Staff and City Council Members have recently received correspondence regarding landscaping in the areas of Portola Avenue and Frank Sinatra, and Deep Canyon Road and Magnesia Falls Drive. The City Manager requested this report to provide the history regarding these areas and alert the Council to the constraints surrounding LLDs, underfunded LLDs, and areas that have no common area funding mechanism. Discussion Landscape and Lighting Districts The City of Palm Desert levies and collects annual special assessments in order to provide and maintain improvements within the Consolidated Palm Desert Landscape and Lighting Maintenance Assessment District (Consolidated District). Formed in 1993, the Consolidated District is comprised of 33 separate benefit Zones. Improvements within Zones typically vary, but can generally be categorized as the following: 1. Local street lighting (residential street lighting associated with the properties within the Zone and/or specific subdivision). 2. Local landscaping improvements including parkways, perimeters, entryways, local medians, and internal landscaping amenities. Staff Repo� LLD Information Report December 9, 2010 Page 2 of 5 3. Special Zone services including tree trimming, graffiti and weed abatement, and maintenance of flood control areas (i.e. retention and detention basins). When forming a new LLD, the engineer's report should forecast all expenditures that will occur annually so that an accurate levy can be established. State law requires that once a levy is put into place it can only be changed by a majority vote (51 percent) of affected properties. Other than a built-in cost of living increase as defined in each LLD, no levy can be increased without the approval of a majority of the affected property owners. During the early 2000s the residential development policy was to require new developments to form either a LLD or HOA. A developer could then choose to go either route. Most developers at the time were choosing to form LLDs as it transferred the maintenance component to the City and is reimbursed through assessments on property tax statements. In 2003-2004, as LLD requests increased, the City Council directed staff to change the policy to require all new developments to form HOAs and that no new formations of LLDs would occur. Unforeseen at the time were several developments underway that had been conditioned in the pre-2003 policy. These specific developments will be addressed later in this staff report. Underfunded Landscape and Lightinq Districts Of the 33 Zones of the Consolidated District, staff has identified the following three as being severely underfunded: 1. Palm Gate: This district is on Deep Canyon Road south of Magnesia Falls. The development includes 37 parcels and each parcel is charged an annual levy of $79.24 per property. Landscape improvements occur in the public right-of-way. 2. Hovley Collection: This district is located on the southeast corner of Hovley Lane West and Monterey Avenue. This development includes 38 parcels and is assessed an annual levy of $141.27 per property. Landscape improvements occur in the public right-of-way. 3. Hovley West: This district is located one street east of Hovley Collection. This district includes 16 parcels and is charged an annual levy of $328.90 per property. Landscape improvements occur in the public right-of-way. As a comparison an adjacent, fully funded Zone requires an annual �evy of $426.00 per year. Since identifying these districts as underFunded, staff has surveyed the property owners in an effort to increase levies. An informal post card survey was conducted in 2009 and in all three cases yielded below the necessary 51 percent to re-ballot the Zone. In light of the results of the surveys, staff proceeded with a project that essentially took the level Staff Report LLD Information Report December 9, 2010 Page 3 of 5 of service to the bare minimum for all three Zones. This project was presented and approved by the Landscape Beautification Committee and eliminated all non-essential plant material leaving only trees and select large shrubs. Removal of the plant material has reduced the overall maintenance costs incurred by the City and the District. Staff indicated to the Landscape Beautification Committee that this proposal was a temporary stopgap intended to keep these three areas looking as good as possible with the available funding. Even with the minimized landscape, it is a challenge to maintain these areas given the limited funding. The long-term solution is to keep working towards increasing the levy for these three Zones. Below is a photo of the Palm Gate area at the conclusion of the landscape removal project. Only large trees and decomposed granite ground covering remain. � j ' ' , �. x*µ E�4"�#.��,�5. k, � �� ' ��" n f%�i�w��� �.��.��,.4'.t,�. �.`���. y� .s ", � ,.:�" M I � : . t #^, Yk„�"i� , ��' I' �i III���I� Illt� i � „i �. . � I� � � , ' '?''�, � >=';,m ;� y, � � .� � J .� <, r._ �` ,k; t.. �;r. , ,; , _r. . ; : - r ,., �{r,i J y ... I �. . r.. �v.—.... ' —�-{ � .�r�. ._..r. '_ _`.�-- —+_. .. ����e!. -k,-k.._..w...m.:_.�. �v_. . � . ....�. It is important to note that during the LLD formation or re-balloting process, costs for administration and forrnation can be recovered. However, if the formation or re-balloting process is defeated by majority vote, the City is responsible for paying for the services to complete this process. Depending on the complexity of each given Zone, costs can range from $5,000 to $15,000. For this reason staff is awaiting a higher level of support from residents prior to recommending a re-ballot to the City Council. Staff Report LLD Information Report December 9, 2010 Page 4 of 5 Unformed Landscape and Liqhtinp Districts Staff is aware of three instances where developments lack either a HOA or lLD for common area improvements due to the 2003-2004 change in policy as stated above. The three developments are west of Portola Avenue between Frank Sinatra and Gerald Ford off of Shepherd Lane. In 2003 as these three developments were under construction, the developers were in the process of forming the LLDs as conditioned by the City's entitlements. By the time the LLD formation documents reached the City Council for review and approval, developers were told that they needed to instead form HOAs and the LLD formations were denied. Forming an HOA requires 100 percent support by all affected property owners and is typically formed early in the development process while there is only one owner, that being the developer. It was nearly impossible in this situation for these three developments to form a HOA at this point because the properties had already been sold. Staff has sent letters to these developments informing them of the details and willingness of the City to aid them in creation of a HOA. To date we have not seen the support needed, or the leadership to take this on. Staff has inquired of the City Attorney as to what action the City should take. Due to the conditions placed on the project and denial of the LLD formation, there is little staff can do to gain compliance from the homeowners. Below are current pictures of properties in this area that were referenced in the correspondence to the City Council. � � _. ��� { ,e[..�. i{ � ' rti'. �. �i nv': ' ..... .. 4y" � ..� �� . . �x �r . l yi t * : x� µ% _ i� 5 �� � q ��� 5 � ..i': '�} �.��"�� . i �4'!„ 4 fi+. ��. .�...__.""____"_..__'"... In some places, the landscape initially installed by the developer remains in place and appears to be minimally maintained, possibly by adjacent property owners. Staff Report LLD Information Report December 9, 2010 Page 5 of 5 Conclusion For the most part, the City's LLDs operate very well and allow the City some control in the appearance of these areas. The three severely underFunded LLDs (Palm Gate, Hovley Collection and Hovley West) are being maintained to the best of our ability with the available funding. Staff recommends that the existing landscaping be further minimized to the point where the available funding will cover the annual maintenance costs. Staff is currently analyzing the associated costs and scope of such projects and intends to retum to the City Council in January with the results. In the case of the three unformed landscape and lighting districts off of Shepherd Lane, staff has not surveyed these residents recently to see if there would be support for a new LLD due to the policy of the City Council. With direction from the City Council, staff could survey for support and begin the process of forming LLDs for these three areas. However, staff is always concerned with the possibility of the homeowners defeating the formation. Fiscal Analvsis It is not known at this time what fiscal impact these items may have. Staff will return to the City Council with potential projects in January 2011. Prepared By: Departme t ea : � yan Ste dell Mark Green ood, P.E Senior Management Analyst Director of Public Works CITY CnUNC1LACTiON Paul Gibson, Director of Finance A�'��tZovrn._., ,nrlvtFn t�r riv 'D � OTHE �/`�7 Ap ed B �j MEF. 1NG DATE — — - / �-�-- AYI�.S: t���r'� NOES: Ir� ■��� J. h M. Wohlmuth, City Manager ABSENT; ,� f AIiSTAtN: '- � VERIFIED BYt Origival on File w�it�Clty 's Ottiq CITY OF PALM DESERT ENGINEER'S ANNUAL LEVY REPORT Consolidated Palm Desert Landscaping And Lighting District Fiscal Year 2010/2011 �.� ,�--.����;:=� y��' -r�, ,�- ,�� y• „r`4�� . �1 �� �� r �-�.. v���`���-�-� � ��',� .M �y � I : INTENT MEETING: May 27,2010 PUBLIC HEARING: June 10,2010 1�W1 LLDAN extending your Financial Services reach , >� A . � � : w � 27368 Via lndustria Oakland,CA Phoenix,AZ Suite 1i0 Sacramento,CA Orlando,FL Temecula,CA 92590 Tel:(951)587-3500 Tel:(800)755-6864 Fax:(951)587-3510 www.willdan.com�nancial ENGINEER'S REPORT AFFIDAVIT ENGINEER'S REP4RT AFFIDAVIT Establishment of Annual Assessments for the: Consolidated Palm Desert Landscaping and Lighting District City of Palm Desert, County of Riverside, State of California This Report identifies the parcels withfn the District and the relevant zones fherein, as they existed at the time of passage of the Resolution of Intention. Reference is hereby made to the Riverside County Assessor's maps for a detailed description of the {ines and dimensions of parcels within the District.The Undersigned respectfully submits the enc{osed Report as directed by the Ciry Cauncil. Dated this z 7 }� day of ,2010. Willdan Financial Services Assessment Engineer On Behalf of the City of Palm Desert By: GLa�c�.a- ?/�� Adina Vazquez, Senior Project Manager Disirict Administrafion Services � �QA��� By. ��"�•� � K�'°�o�Cy Richard Kopecky c� v � R.C.E.# t6742 � � C 16742 � � � IXP� � C�J` C 1�/�r- �`Q` qT�oF cA�1��Q• TABLE OF CONTENTS I. OVE RV I EW.....................................................................................................................................1 A. Introduction..........................................................................................................................1 B. Compliance with the Current Legislation..........................................................................2 C. General Description of the District and Services..............................................................2 II. SPECIFIC IMPROVEMENTS AND SPECIAL BENEFIT ZONES...................................................5 III. METHOD OF APPORTIONMENT................................................................................................16 A. General...............................................................................................................................16 B. Benefit Analysis.................................................................................................................16 C. Assessment Methodology................................................................................................18 D. Assessment Range Formula.............................................................................................19 IV. DISTRICT BUDGETS..............................................................................................................21 A. Description of Budget Items.............................................................................................21 B. District Budgets.................................................................................................................24 APPENDIX A—DISTRICT BOUNDARY MAPS.................................................................................26 APPENDIX B—201012011 ASSESSMENT ROLL..............................................................................30 Consolidated Palm Desert Landscaping and Lighting Maintenance Assessment District Engineer's Report Fiscal Year 2010/2011 I. Overview A. Introduction The City of Palm Desert (hereafter referred to as "City") annually levies and collects special assessments in order to provide and maintain improvements within the Consolidated Paim Desert Landscaping and Lighting Maintenance Assessment District(hereafter referred to as the "District"). The District was formed in 1993, through the consolidation of severai individual landscaping and lighting maintenance tlistricts that previously existed within the City. The original districts and subsequent annexations of various territories and developments to the Consolidated District are identified as separate Zones antl/or Sub-zones (hereafter referred to jointly as "Zones"). The District and the Zones therein have been established and are levied annual assessments pursuant to the Landscaping and Lighting Act of 1972, Part 2 of Division 15 of the California Sfreefs and Highways Code(hereafter referred to as the"1972 Act"). This Engineer's Annual Levy Report (hereafter referretl to as the "Report") describes the District and improvements, any proposed changes to the District or improvements and the proposed budgets and assessments for Fiscal Year 2010/2011. The proposed assessments are based on the City's estimated cost to maintain the improvements that provide special benefit to properties within the District. The various improvements within the District and the costs of those improvements are identified and budgeted separately for each Zone, including the expenditures, deficits, surpluses, revenues, and reserves. The word "parcel,"for the purposes of this Report, refers to an individual property assigned its own Assessment Number by the Riverside County Assessor's Office. The Riverside County Auditor/Controller uses Assessment Numbers and specific Fund Numbers, to identify on the tax roll, properties assessed for special district benefit assessments. Each parcel within a Zone is assessed proportionately for only those improvements provided in that Zone from which the parcel receives special benefit. At a noticed Public Hearing, the City Council will consider all testimony and wntten comments presented and may direct any necessary modifications to the Report and approve the Report as submitted or amended. Following approval of the Report,the City Council by resolution, shall order the improvements to be made, and confirm the levy and collection of assessments pursuant to the 1972 Act. The assessment rates and method of apportionment described in this Report as approved by the City Council defines the assessments to be applied to each parcel within the District for Fiscal Year 2010/2011. The assessments as approved will be submitted to the Riverside County Auditor/Controller to be included on the property tax roll for each parcel for the fiscal year. Willdan Financia!Seivices Page 1 Consolidated Palm Desert Landscaping and Lighting Maintenance Assessment District Engineer's Report Fiscal Year 2010/2011 B. Compiiance with the Current Legislation The City Councii annually conducts a public hearing to accept public comments and testimony, to review the Report and adopt the annual assessments to be levied on the County tax roll for the fiscal year. The assessments described in this Report and subsequently approved by the City Council have been prepared in accordance with the 1972 Act and in compliance with the provisions of the California Constitution, Artic%XlllD(hereafter referred to as the "Article XIIID"), which was enacted by the passage of Proposition 218 in November 1996. In compliance with the provisions of Article XIIID, in Fiscal Year 199711998, the City conducted property owner ballot proceedings for the special benefit assessments applicable to each of the existing Zones within the District. At that time, the assessments presented to property owners included the assessment range formula previously estabiished for the District and described in this Report. Upon tabulation of the bailots returned, it was determined that majority protest did not exist and the City Council approved and adopted the assessments and assessment range formula balloted and approved by the property owners. Similar proceedings have been conducted for all new or increased assessments including any annexations to the District. C. General Description of the District and Services The City annually levies and collects assessments in order to maintain and service various improvements within the District. For Fiscal Year 2410/2011,the District is comprised of thirty-three (33)separate benefit Zones, each funding specific improvements and services. The District provitles for the maintenance and operation of local landscaping and lighting improvements and associated appurtenances located within the public right-of-ways and dedicated landscape easements. The improvements and the annual costs of those improvements are identified and budgeted separately for each Zone, including the expenditures, deficits, surpluses, revenues, and reserves. The improvements provided and for which parcels are levied special benefit assessments within the District can be categorized as three(3) improvement types. 1. Local street lighting (residential street lighting associated with the properties within the Zone and specific subdivisions). 2. Local landscaping improvements including parkways, perimeters, entryways, local medians, and internal landscaped amenities. 3. Special Zone services including tree trimming, graffiti and weed abatement and landscape maintenance of flood control areas(retention and detention basins). The costs associated with the improvements authorized by the provisions of the 1972 Act are equitably spread among the benefiting parcels in proportion to the special benefit they receive. Only parcels that receive special benefits from the improvements are assessed, and each Zone consists of parcels that benefit from those specific improvements. Willdan FinancialSen�ices Page 2 Consolidated Palm Desert Landscaping and Lighting Maintenance Assessment District Engineer's Report Fiscal Year 2010/2011 Landscape improvements maintained by the District and associated with each Zone were either installed as a condition of development or were installed for the benefit of the properties assessed. The landscape improvements associated with each Zone may include, but are not limited to: open space areas; metlians; parkways; slopes; retention or detention basin areas; antl public right-of- ways or easements that provide special benefits to the parcels. These improvements may inclutle, but are not limited to: turf, ground cover, shrubs and trees, irrigation systems, tlecorative lighting, water features, entry monuments, drainage systems, hardscapes and associated appurtenances. Similar to landscape improvements, street lighting improvements funded through District assessments were installed for the benefit of properties within each of the Zones and the assessments provide for the maintenance, operation and energy costs related to those street light improvements. Willdan Financia/Seivices Paqe 3 Consolidated Palm Desert Landscaping and Lighting Maintenance Assessment District Engineer's Report Fiscal Year 2010/2011 The following table lists the Zones and Sub-zones within the District and a summary of the parcels for Fiscal Year 2010/2011. BENEFIT ZONES Assessable Zone Number Zone Name Total Parcels Parcels Total EBU Zone#2 Can on Cove 225 222 222.00 Zone#3 Vine ards 147 132 133.20 Zone#4 Parkview Estates 175 172 172.00 Zone#5 Cook&Country Ciub: Sub-Zone#5 DM Desert Mirage 29 29 29.00 Sub-Zone#5 SC Sandcastles 41 41 41.00 Sub-Zone#5 PR Primrose 2 37 37 37.00 Zone#6 Hovley Lane: Sub-Zone#6 MM Monterey Meadows 40 40 40.00 Sub-Zone#6 HG The Glen 16 16 16.00 Sub-Zone#6 HE Hovley Estates 17 16 16.00 Sub-Zone#6 S1 Sonata I 16 16 16.00 Sub-Zone#6 S2 Sonata II 94 94 94.00 Sub-Zone#6 HC Hovley Collection 38 38 38.00 Sub-Zone#6 L1 La Paloma I 17 16 16.00 Sub-Zone#6 LZ La Paloma II 19 16 16.00 Sub-Zone#6 L3 La Paloma iii 17 15 15.00 Sub-Zone#6 SP Sandpiper Court 19 16 16.00 Sub-Zone#6 SW Sandpiper West 19 16 16.00 Sub-Zone#6 HW Hovley Court West 18 16 16.00 Sub-Zone#6 DB Diamondback 20 20 20.00 Sub-Zone#6 PC Palm Court 20 20 20.00 Zone#7 Warin Court 16 16 16.00 Zone#8 Palm Gate 37 37 37.00 Zone#9 The Grove 105 105 105.00 Zone#11 Portola Place 23 23 23.00 Zone#13 Palm Desert Count Club 1,864 1,818 2,327.33 Zone#14 K&B at Palm Desert 165 163 163.00 Zone#15 Can on Crest 71 67 67.00 Zone#16 Shepard Lane: Sub-Zone#16 CV College View Estates II 32 32 32.00 Sub-Zone#16 SD Sundance West 36 32 32.00 Sub-Zone#16 CV1 Coilege View Estates I 32 32 32.00 Sub-Zone#16 P1 Petunia l 32 32 32.00 Sub-Zone#16 SE Sundance East 14 14 14.00 Sub-Zone#16 BD The Boulders 16 16 16.00 Total District 3,467 3,375 3,885.53 Willdan Frnancial Seivices Page 4 Consolidated Palm Desert Landscaping and Lighting Maintenance Assessment District Engineer's Report Fiscal Year 2010/2011 II. SPECIFIC IMPROVEMENTS AND SPECIAL BENEFIT ZONES The boundaries of each Zone, the location of improvements and special benefit received by the properties antl property owners within each Zone are described in this section of the Report. In any given fiscal year, City staff will determine the scope of work for each Zone as assessment revenues allow. Any necessary reductions in the scope of work wili likely include, but are not limited to; the frequency of mowing and edging turf areas; the application of fertilizers and aeration of turf; trimming and pruning of shrubs, trees and ground cover;trash pick-up in landscaping areas; and weed and litter control. The allocation of special benefit and general benefit of the improvements provided within the District are summarized in the Methotl of Apportionment section of this Report and are identified in the budget for each Zone. A description of the District improvements and the level of annual service each Zone will receive are provided in the following: Zone#2(Canyon Cove): Zone #2 includes Tracts 11636-1, 2, 3, & 4 and Tract 23485, generally located South of Deep Canyon Tennis Club, North of Haystack Road, West of Marrakesh Country C�ub, antl East of Highway 74. The streets within the Zone include Ambrosia Street, Sweetbrush Lane, Deer Grass Drive, Lotus Court, Calliandra Street, Aber Street and Alamo Drive, These parcels benefit from the maintenance and operation of street lighting encompassing the streets within the Zone, the landscaped parkway along the East side of Highway 74 and the landscaped areas on the North side of Haystack Road, adjacent to the above mentioned tracts antl installed as part of these residential developments. The interior local street lighting has been identified and allocated as 100% special benefit with no general benefit allocation. The parkway landscaping along Highway 74 has been identified as 100% special benefit to the parcels within the Zone. However, it has been determined that the landscaped median on Haystack Road {although installed as part of the development) not only provides a special benefit to properties within Canyon Cove, but also provides a general benefit. The proportionate general benefit of this improvement has been identified and eliminated from the Zone assessments. Although there is a general benefit component, the majority (83%) of the median landscaping on Haystack Roatl is a flood control channel and was required for development of the homes within Canyon Cove. Therefore, pursuant to Article XIIID Section 5a (assessments used to fund flood control and drainage systems) the majority of the costs for this landscaped area could be considered exempt. However, in recognition of the general benefit this improvement area provides and the previous assessments applied to properties within the Zone, it was determined that the City would fund a large portion of the costs associated with this landscaped median area. Refer to the budget section of this Report for details on the allocation of benefit and related assessments. Wr//dan Financral Services Page 5 Consolidated Palm Desert Landscaping and Lighting Maintenance Assessment District Engineer's Report Fiscal Year 2010/2011 Zone#3(Vineyards): Zone #3 consists of the parcels in Tracts 12181-1 and 12181-2 on the West side of Portola Avenue. The streets within the Zone include Martini Court, Heitz Court, Mondavi Court, Callaway Court, Stony Hill Court, Masson Street, Krug Avenue, Sebastian Way, and San Pasqual Avenue/Rutledge Way. These parcels receive special benefits from the operation and maintenance of street lighting improvements within the Zone boundaries antl the landscapetl area along the West side of Portola Avenue,from the northern boundary to the southern boundary of the two tracts. Both the street lighting and landscape improvements identified for this Zone were instalfed as part of the residential development and the ongoing maintenance and operation of these improvements provide special benefits to properties within the Zone. It has further been determined that these improvements were installed and are maintained solely for the benefit of properties within the Zone antl the improvements provitle no measurable benefit to properties outside the Zone. Any benefit conveyed to other properties or to the public at large(general benefit) is incidental. Therefore, both the interior tract street lighting and the parkway(perimeter) landscaping costs have been identified and apportioned 100%as a special benefit to the parcels within the Zone. Zone#4(Parkview Estates): Zone#4 consists of the parcels in Tract 8237, South of Magnesia Falls Dnve, North of Fred Waring Drive, West of Deep Canyon Road, and East of Portola Avenue. These parcels receive special benefits from the operation and maintenance of street lighting along Primrose Drive, Desert Star Boulevard, Vanda Circle, Palmilla Circle, Myrsine Avenue, Gazania Place, Rutledge Avenue, Buttonwood Drive, Silktree Lane, Santolina Drive, Balsam Lane, and Erin Street. The street lighting improvements were installed as part of the residential development and are considered a special benefit to the properties within the development(i.e., Zone). The ongoing operation and maintenance of interior residential street lighting provides no measurable general benefit to properties outside the Zone or to the public at large. To the extent that some streetlights associated with the Zone are located on the perimeter of the residential development and provides direct illumination to parcels outside the Zone, a portion of the maintenance costs has been identified as a general benefit. This Zone has twenty interior streetlights and five perimeter streetlights resulting in an allocation of the Zone costs as 90% special benefit and 10% general benefit. Zone#5(Cook and Country Club): Zone #5 consists of three (3) separate residential subdivisions identified as Sub-zones. These three Sub-zones are known and identified as the Desert Mirage (Tract 25639), Sandcastles (Tract 21338-1), and Primrose 2(Tract 25436). Each of these Sub-zones has specific local improvements maintained by the District that were installed as part of these residential developments. These three subdivisions were originally part of a larger Zone known as Cook and Country Club and were proportionately assessed for median landscaping in the area as well as their local (tract Willdan Financia/Seivrces Page 6 Consolidated Palm Desert Landscaping and Lighting Maintenance Assessment District Engineer's Report Fiscal Year 2010/2011 specific) improvements. in fiscal year 1997/1998 it was determined that the median landscaping in the Cook and Country Club area was largely a general benefit and this portion of the assessment was eliminated. However, it was determined that the parcels within these three (3) Sub-zones receive special benefit from tract specific improvements maintained by the District, and each parcel within the respective Sub-zones should continue to be assessed proportionately for the cost of services associated with those local improvements. Upon review of the specific street lighting improvements associated with each of these Sub-zones, the street lighting facilities have been identified as interior tract streetlights. These streetlights provide little or no tlirect illumination to parcels outside the Sub-zones and therefore the costs of maintaining these improvements are allocated as 100%special benefit with no general benefit. Upon review, it has been determined that 15% of the improvements within the Desert Mirage Sub- Zone are of a general benefit to those properties outside of the Sub-zone. Therefore, this percentage of the costs of maintaining the Sub-zone has been removetl from the assessment and must be funded from other sources. The property owners in Sub-zone known as Desert Mirage were balloted in Fiscal Year 2004/2005 for an increase in their maximum assessment rates. The proposed levy increase would fund new maintenance costs required after the City of Palm Desert renovated the improvements with water efficient landscaping and irrigation systems. Majority protest did not exist, therefore the City will move forward with the plans to renovate the improvements in the Desert Mirage Sub-zone. Refer to the budget for Zone 5 in Section IV of this Report for specifics regarding the proposed assessment for the current fiscal year and the maximum assessment. Zone#6(Hovley Lane): Parcels within this Zone are located generally East of Monterey Avenue and West of Portola Avenue and includes parcels and tracts along Hovley Lane West. Zone 6 includes the following subdivisions and Sub-zones: • Monterey Meadows (Tracts 21791 and • La Paloma 2(Tract 24773) 22741) • La Paloma 3(Tract 29045) • The Glen(Tract 25217) • Sandpiper Court(Tract 27370) • Hovley Estates(Tract 24591) • Hovley Court West(Tract 29585) • Sonata 1 (Tract 23982) • Sandpiper West(Tract 29579) • Sonata II(Tracts 24254-1,2,3) • Diamondback Road(Tract 29893) • Hovley Collection(Tract 24603} • Palm Court(Tract 25373) • La Paloma 1 (Tract 24773-1} The parcels within each of the fourteen (14) Sub-zones of Zone 6 (Hovley Lane) receive benefit from various improvements that were installed as part of the separate resitlential developments and are specific to each tract and subdivision. The assessment for each Sub-zone funds and provides for the parkway landscaping improvements adjacent to each tract along Hovley Lane as Willdan Financial Seivices Page7 Consolidated Palm Desert Landscaping and Lighting Maintenance Assessment District Engineer's Report Fiscal Year 2010l2011 well as specific in-tract improvements. The in-tract improvements may inciude street lighting; dry well and retention basin landscape maintenance; and landscaping of additional parkway areas. The improvements within Zone 6 include street lighting on Clover Lane, Meadow Lane, Hovley Lane West, Centennial Circle, Posada Court, Via Fonda, Sonata Court, Avenida Arcadia, Avenida Solana, Sandpiper Court, Avenida Rosario, Sandpiper Court West Hovley Court, Diamondback Roatl, and Palm Court; landscaped parkways along Hovley Lane West, Monterey Avenue, Portola Avenue and landscaped retention basins located within Hovley Estates, Hovley Collections, La Paloma 1, La Paloma 2, Sandpiper Court, and Sandpiper Court West. Upon review of the specific street lighting improvements associated with each of these Sub-zones, the street lighting facilities have been identified as tract specific streetlights. To the extent that some streetlights associated with the Glen, Sonata I and Hovley West Sub-zones are located on the perimeter of the development and provide direct illumination to parcels outside the subdivision, a portion of the maintenance costs (15%) have been identified as a general benefit component. Therefore, the cost of maintaining the street light improvements is allocated as 85% special benefit to properties within these Sub-zones. Similarly, it has been determined that a portion of the parkway landscape improvements associated with the Glen, Sonata I and Hovley West Sub-zones provide a general benefit to properties outside of these Sub-zones. Therefore, 15% of the costs of maintaining these landscaped areas has been removed from the assessments and will be funded from other sources. The landscape improvements associated with each of the remaining Sub-zones provide no measurable general benefit to properties outside the Zone or to the public at large, and therefore, their specific local landscaping improvements and the corresponding assessments have been identified 100% as a special benefit to parcels within the Sub-zones. The property owners in the nine (9) Sub-zones known as The Glen, Hovley Estates, Sonata I, Sonata II, La Paloma I, Santlpiper Court, Sandpiper West, Hovley West and Hovley Collection, were balloted in Fiscal Year 200412005 for an increase in their maximum assessment rates. In conjunction with the assessment increase, the City proposed to renovate the existing improvements with more water efficient landscaping and modifications to the irrigation system. For seven (7) of the nine (9) Sub-zones balloted, majority protest did not exist and the City will move forward with the plans to renovate the improvements in those Sub-zones. However, majority protest existed in Hovley West and Hovley Collection, and the proposed assessment increase for these two Sub-zones will not be imposed. Without the additional maintenance funding, the City will not be able to renovate the improvements for these two Sub-zones, but will continue to maintain the existing improvements at a level of service compensatory with the available assessment revenues at the existing assessment rates. Refer to the budgets for Zone 6 in Section IV of this Report for specifics regarding the proposed assessment for the current fiscal year and the maximum assessment. In Fiscal Year 2004I2005 the Palm Court Sub-zone was annexed to Zone 6 through property owner protest hearing proceedings. Upon conclusion of a noticed Public Hearing, it was tletermined that a majority protest did not exist. Upon review of the specific improvements associated within this Sub-zone, benefit conveyed to other properties or to the public at large (general benefit) has been determined by companson to be incidental. Therefore, the costs of the Willdan Financia!Seivices Page 8 Consolidated Palm Desert Landscaping and Lighting Maintenance Assessment District Engineer's Report Fiscal Year 2010/2011 on-going operation and maintenance of the improvements have been identified and apportioned 100%as a special benefit to the parcels within the Sub-zone. Zone#7(Waring Court): Zone 7 consists of Tract 25304, North of Fred Waring Drive and East of Phyllis Jackson Lane. These parcels receive special benefit from the ongoing maintenance of landscaped parkways along Fred Waring Drive and Phyllis Jackson Lane adjacent to the tract. The improvements were installed as part of the residential development and it has been determined that the operation and maintenance of the landscape improvements provitle no measurable general benefit to other properties outside the Zone or to the public at large. Therefore, the local landscaping improvements associated with this Zone and the costs of providing these improvements have been identified as 100%special benefit to parcels within Zone 7. Zone#8(Palm Gate): Zone 8 consists of the parcels in Tract 24287 located East of Deep Canyon Road, and North of Fred Waring Drive, on Coral Bells Circle, Daylily Circle, and Moss Rose Drive. These parcels receive benefit from the maintenance and operation of local street lighting at the entrances to the development at the corners of Deep Canyon Road and Coral Bells Circle, Daylily Circle, and Moss Rose Drive. These parcels also receive special benefit from the maintenance of the landscaped parkways adjacent to the development on Deep Canyon Road. Both the street lighting and landscape improvements identified for this Zone were installed as part of the residential development and the ongoing maintenance and operation of these improvements provide special benefit to properties within the Zone. It has been determined that these improvements were installed and are maintained solely for the benefit of properties within the Zone and provide no measurable benefit to properties outside the Zone or to the public at large. Therefore, both the interior tract street lighting and the parkway(perimeter) landscaping costs have been identified and apportioned 100%as a special benefit to the parcels within the Zone. In conjunction with a proposed renovation and upgrade of the existing landscape improvements the property owners in Zone 8 were balloted in Fiscal Year 2004/2005 for an increase in their maximum assessment rates. Majority protest existed and the maximum assessment rate will not be increased over the amount previously approved for the Zone. Since the assessment increase was not approved the City will not move forward with the proposed renovations, but will continue to maintain the existing improvements at a level of service compensatory with the available assessment revenues. Refer to the budget for Zone 8 in Section IV of this Report for specifics regarding the proposed assessment for the current fiscal year and the maximum assessment. Zone#9(The Grove): Zone 9 consists of the parcels in Tract 24984 South of Goleta Avenue and West of Deep Canyon Road. Wil/dan Financial Sen�ices Page 9 Consolidated Palm Desert Landscaping and Lighting Maintenance Assessment District Engineer's Report Fiscal Year 2010/2011 These parcels receive special benefits from the improvements and maintenance of street lighting at the entrance to the development at the corner of Deep Canyon Road and Royal Canyon Lane as well as interior street lighting on Kings Canyon Lane, Indian Canyon Lane, Hazei Canyon Lane, and Royal Canyon Lane. These parcels also receive special benefits from the improvements and maintenance of parkway landscaping atljacent to the tract on Deep Canyon Road, and interior landscaping, including an entryway median, parkway landscaping and palm tree trimming within the public right-of-ways on Royal Canyon Lane that were installed as part of the resitlentiai tract development. Both the street lighting and landscape improvements identified for this Zone were installed as part of the residential tract development and the ongoing maintenance and operation of these improvements provide special benefit to properties within the Zone. It has further been determined that these improvements were installed and are maintained solely for the benefit of properties within the Zone and the improvements provide no measurable benefit to properties outside the Zone or to the public at large. Therefore, both the tract street lighting and the landscaping costs (parkways and interior landscaping) have been identified and apportioned 100% as a special benefit to the parceis within the Zone. As part of the overall landscaping costs for this Zone, specialized maintenance (palm tree trimming) is budgeted separately as this service is not covered under the regular maintenance contract the City has with its landscape contractor. However, like other landscape maintenance within the Zone this service benefits only the properties within the Zone and has been identified as 100°!o special benefit. Zone#11 (Portola Place): Zone 11 is generaliy located South of Santa Rosa Way and East of Portola Avenue and consists of the parcels in Tract 27692. These parcels receive special benefits from the servicing and maintenance of the landscaped parkways adjacent to the tract on Portola Avenue and Santa Rosa Way, and interior tract landscaping on Olive Court installed as part of the residential development. The developer (D & F Development) was conditioned to form the necessary District Zone for the public improvements that would be installed as part of subdivision tract 27692. In a letter to the City dated April 4, 1994, the developer(sole owner of the property at that time) requested inclusion of the parcels within the tract into the District and to be assessed annually for the cost of maintaining the improvements. This letter constitutes a 100% landowner petition pursuant to Article XIIID and supports a position that the assessments imposed prior to July 1, 1997 were exempt from the requirements of Article XIID. Although the assessments for these improvements were identified as exempt in fiscal Year 1997/1998 and not subject to the procedural requirements of a protest balloting procedure, the improvements and the related assessments for this Zone were identified as 100°/a special benefit. It has been determined that the ongoing operation and maintenance of the improvements provide no measurable general benefit to other properties outside the Zone or to the public at large. Therefore, Willdan Financial Ser►�ices Page 10 Consolidated Palm Desert Landscaping and Lighting Maintenance Assessment District Engineer's Report Fiscal Year 2010/2011 these improvements, the corresponding assessments and the annuai inflationary adjustment previously approved by landowner petition are in compliance with the substantive requirements of the proposition. However, any future increases to the assessments will require property owner ballot proceedings. Zone#13(Palm Desert Country Club): Zone 13 is located generally South of Hovley Lane East, North of Fred Waring Drive, West of Wamer Trail, and West of Washington and is commonly referred to as the Palm Desert Country Club area. The parcels within this Zone receive special benefits from the servicing and maintenance of entryway landscaping on State Street and Washington Avenue, parkway landscaping along Fred Waring Drive and local residential street lighting within the Zone. Parcels within Zone 13 were annexed into the City in Fiscal Year 1994/95. Prior to City annexation the local improvements within this Zone were assessed and collected by the County through a County Service Area (CSA). When the properties were annexed to the City, the City established this territory as Zone 13 within the District and the CSA fund balance was transferretl to the Zone 13 account. For the first two years, the City used the fund balance to fully cover the annual cost of providing the improvements. In Fiscal Year 1996/1997 the remaining fund balance was designated as reserves and the District levied its first annual assessment for the Zone. Because the reserve fund balance was greater than the amount typically held in reserves, the City Council determined that a portion of the reserves woultl be used each year to offset the annual expenditures thereby allowing the annual assessments to remain fairly constant and also gradually reduce the reserve fund to normal levels. In Fiscal Year 1997/1998, in compliance with Article XIIID, a property owner ballot proceeding was conducted to approve the existing annual assessment. At that time, the property owners approved the proposed assessment amount plus an annual inflation adjustment. The assessment amount approved by the property owners was based on the continued policy of utilizing reserve fund contributions to offset the actual expenses for the Zone. In Fiscal Year 1999/2000, property owners within Zone 13 were re-balloted for an increased assessment to cover the maintenance costs associated with the new landscaping improvements to be installed on Fred Waring Drive. Property owners were balloted for an amount sufficient to cover the actual Zone expenses, although a portion of the existing reserves continued to be usetl to reduce the annual assessments. Refer to the budget for Zone 13 in Section IV of this Report for specifics regarding the proposed assessment for the current fiscal year and the maximum assessment. The street lighting and landscape improvements assessed within this Zone clearly provide special benefits to properties within the Zone. It has been tletermined that the improvements were installed and are maintained solely for the benefit of properties within the Zone and the improvements provide no measurable benefit to properties outside the Zone or to the public at large. Therefore, both the street lighting and the landscaping costs (parkways and interior landscaping) have been identified and apportioned 100%as a special benefit to parcels within the Zone. Willdan Financral Services Page 11 Consolidated Palm Desert Landscaping and Lighting Maintenance Assessment District Engineer's Report Fiscal Year 2010/2011 Zone#14(K 8�B at Paim Desert): Zone 14 is located generally North of Frank Sinatra Drive, West of Portola Avenue, East of Monterey Avenue and South of Gerald Ford Drive. The Zone includes the parcels in Tracts 28258 and 28258-1. The properties within the boundaries of Zone 14 benefit from street lighting within the development locatetl on Drexell Drive, Heatherwood Drive, Emerson Drive and Jamerson Road, and Colebridge Street, as well as landscaping associated with the retention basin area located on Heatherwood Drive and dry well areas within the subtlivisions installed by the developer as part of the residential development. In conjunction with a proposed renovation and upgrade of the existing landscape improvements, the property owners in Zone 14 were balloted in Fiscal Year 2004/05 for�an increase in their maximum assessment rates. Majority protest did not exist, and based on the approval of the new assessment rate, the City will move forward with the plans to renovate the improvements with more water efficient landscaping and modifications to the irrigation system. Refer to the budget for Zone 14 in Section IV of this Report for specifics regarding the proposed assessment for the current fiscal year and the maximum assessment. It has been determined that fifteen percent (15%) of the improvements within the K & B Sub-Zone are of a general benefit to those properties outside of the Sub-zone. Therefore, this percentage of the costs of maintaining the Sub-zone has been removed from the assessment and must be funded from other City funding sources. Zone#15(Canyon Crest): Zone 15 consists of Tract 25102-1 and 25102 generally located east of Deep Canyon Road, south of the Whitewater River Channel, north of Moss Rose Drive, and west of the Palm Desert High School. This Zone was established and annexed to the District on March 11, 1999 pursuant to the Act and a property owner ballot proceeding. These parcels receive special benefit from the operation and maintenance of landscaped parkways along the east side of Deep Canyon Road from Magnesia Falls (Whitewater River Channel), south to the end of the development (approximately 100 feet north of Buttonwood Drive); perimeter landscaping along the Whitewater River Channel (the northern boundary of the development and District) from Deep Canyon Road eastward to the western boundary of the development (approximately 675 linear feet of the total 1275 feet is landscaped). The improvements for this Zone were installed as part of the residential developments. It has been determined that the ongoing operation and maintenance of the landscape improvements provide no measurable general benefit to other properties outside the Zone or to the public at large. Therefore, the local landscaping improvements associated with this Zone and the associated annual costs have been identifietl as 100% special benefit to parcels within Zone 15. Refer to the budget for Zone 15 in Section IV of this Report for specifics regartling the proposed assessment for the current fiscal year and the maximum assessment. Willdan Financial Services Page 12 Consolidated Palm Desert Landscaping and Lighting Maintenance Assessment District Engineer's Report Fiscal Year 2010/2011 Zone#16(Shepard Lane): Zone #16 consists of six (6) separate residential subdivisions identified as Sub-zones. These six Sub-zones are known and identified as Coilege View Estates I (Tract 29444), College View Estates il (Tract 30087), Sundance West (Tract 30216), Sundance East (Tract 30503), Petunia l (Tract 30025), and Boulders (Tract 30030). Each of these Sub-zones has specific local improvements maintained by the District that were installetl as part of these residential developments. There are several residential subdivisions within the area known as Shepherd Lane. The parcels within each of the six (6) Sub-zones of Zone 16 (Shepard Lane) receive benefit from various improvements that were installed as part of the separate residentiai developments and are specific to each tract and subdivision. Perimeter landscaping for the Shepherd Lane residential developments includes parkway/perimeter landscaping on the west side of Portola Avenue between Frank Sinatra Drive and Gerald Ford Drive, as well as landscaping on the north sitle of Frank Sinatra Drive and the south side of Gerald Ford Drive on either side of Shepherd Lane. These improvements benefit the property development within the Shepherd Lane area and each residential subdivision is assessed a proportional share of the costs associated with these landscaped areas as well as specific in-tract improvements. Specific in-tract improvements include: Sub-Zone College View Estates I: • This Sub-zone's proportional benefit of parkway/perimeter landscaping along the west side of Portola Avenue adjacent to the residential subdivision (generally between Frank Sinatra Drive and Gerald Ford Drive); • Parkway landscaping along both sides of Shepherd Lane adjacent to the residential subdivision (generally between Frank Sinatra Drive and Gerald Ford Drive); • Streetlights within the residential subdivision andlor adjacent to the subdivision on both the east and west sides of Shepherd Lane and the west side of Portola Avenue installed as part of the residential subtlivision. Sub-Zone College View Estates II: • This Sub-zone's proportional benefit of parkway/perimeter landscaping on both sides of Shepherd Lane and the west side of Portola Avenue adjacent to the residential subdivision, installed as part of the development of properties therein; • Street lights within and adjacent to the residential subdivision. Sub-Zone Sundance West: • Two landscape easements located on the west side of Shepherd Lane at Kokopelli Circle. Willdan Financial Services Page 13 Consolidated Palm Desert Landscaping and Lighting Maintenance Assessment District Engineer's Report Fiscal Year 2010/2011 • Two landscape easements located on the west side of Shepherd Lane at Chinook Circle. • Parkway landscaping along Shepherd Lane adjacent to the residential subdivision. Specifically the parkway area on the west side of Shepherd Lane which extends the length of Tract 30216; � Streetlights within the residential subdivision andlor adjacent to the subdivision on both the east and west sides of Shepherd Lane and the west side of Portola Avenue installed as part of the residential subdivision. Sub-Zone Sundance East: • This Sub-zone's proportional benefit of perimeter/parkway landscaping on the west sitle of Portola Avenue between Frank Sinatra Drive and Gerald Ford Drive associated with the development; • Parkway landscaping on Shepherd Lane adjacent to the residential development installed as part of the development of properties therein. • Street lights within and adjacent to the residential subdivision. Sub-Zone Petunia l: • Three landscape easements identified as the parkway landscaping on the east side of Shepherd Lane adjacent to the tract north and south of East Petunia Place antl the parkway landscaping easement on the west side of Portola Avenue adjacent to the tract. • Two landscape easements identified as the parkway landscaping on the west side of Shepherd Lane adjacent to the tract north and south of West Petunia Place. Willdan FinancialSen�ices Page 14 Consolidated Palm Desert Landscaping and Lighting Maintenance Assessment District Engineer's Report Fiscal Year 2010/2011 Sub-Zone The Boulders: • Parkway landscaping on Shephertl Lane adjacent to the residential development installed as part of the development of properties therein; • This Sub-zone's proportional benefit of parkwaylperimeter landscaping on the west side of Portola Avenue between Frank Sinatra Drive and Gerald Ford Drive, as well as landscaping on the north side of Frank Sinatra Drive and the south side of Gerald Ford Drive on either side of Shepherd Lane. • Street lights within and adjacent to the residential subdivision. It has been determined upon review of the specific improvements, that a portion of the street lighting and parkway landscape improvements associated with the College View Estates I, College View Estates II, Sundance East, and Petunia l Sub-zones provide some general benefit to properties outside of these Sub-zones. These improvements include the parkway/perimeter maintenance along Portola Avenue. A portion of the maintenance costs up to 15% have been identified by the City as a general benefit component have been removed from the assessments and will be funded from other sources. The improvements associated with the remaining Sub- zones provide no measurable general benefit to properties outside the Zone or to the public at large, and therefore, their specific local landscaping improvements are allocated 100% as special benefit to parcels within the Sub-zones. Willdan Financial Services Page 15 Consolidated Palm Desert Landscaping and Lighting Maintenance Assessment District Engineer's Report Fiscal Year 2010/2011 III. Method of Apportionment A. General The 1972 Act permits the establishment of assessment districts by agencies for the purpose of providing certain public improvements which include the construction, maintenance and servicing of public lights, landscaping and appurtenant facilities. The 1972 Act further requires that the cost of these improvements be levied according to benefit rather than assessed value: "The net amount to be assessed upon lands within an assessment dist�ict may be apportioned by any formuia or method which fairly distributes the net amount among all assessable lots o�parcels in proportion to the estimated bene�ts to Be received by each such lot or parcel from the impro vements," The formula usetl for calculating assessments in each Zone of the District therefore reflects the composition of the parcels, and the improvements and services provided, to fairly apportion the costs based on estimated benefit to each parcel. In addition, pursuant to Articie XIIID Section 4 a parcel's assessment may not exceed the reasonable cost of the proportional special benefit conferred on that parcel and provides that only special benefits are assessable and the District must separate the general benefits from the special benefits. Therefore, in compliance with the new assessment requirements only assessments that are identified as either "Exempt Assessments" or "Special Benefit Assessments" are assessed. The costs of any improvements considered to be uGeneral Benefit" have been eliminated from the District assessments. B. Benefit Analysis Each of the proposed improvements, the associated costs and assessments has been carefully reviewed by the City and has been identified and allocated based on benefit pursuant to the provisions of the 1972 Act and Article XIIID of the California Constitutian. Each improvement and the associated costs have been identified as either "general benefits" or "special benefits". Although some existing assessments within the District qualified as exempt assessments pursuant to Article XIIID, Section 5 of the Constitution and did not require a ballot proceeding under the provisions of Section 4, the improvements associated with these assessments are considered a special benefit to the assessed properties and are in compliance with the substantive requirements of Article XIIID Section 4. The maximum assessment rates shown in this report are consistent with the provisions of Article XIIID and any new or increased assessments shall be subject to the provisions of Section 4 therein. Special Benefits The method of apportionment (or method of assessment) is based on the premise that each of the assessed parcels within the District and Zones receives benefit from the improvements maintained and financed by District assessments. Specifically, the assessments associated with each Zone are for the maintenance of local street lighting and landscaped improvements installed as part of the original development of the parcels within the Zones or were later installed for the benefit of those properties. Willdan Financia/Services Page 16 Consolidated Palm Desert Landscaping and Lighting Maintenance Assessment District Engineer's Report Fiscal Year 2010/2011 The desirability and security of properties within each Zone is enhanced by the presence of street lighting and well-maintained landscaping in close proximity to those properties. The landscape improvements provided by the District may include landscaped medians, parkways, entryways, slopes and appurtenant facilities. Street lighting improvements may include energy costs and necessary maintenance to the facilities related thereto. The annual assessments outlined in this Report are proposed to cover the estimated costs to provide necessary service, operation, administration and maintenance required each year to keep these improvements in a healthy, vigorous and satisfactory condition. The special benefits associated with the local landscaping improvements are specifically: • Enhanced desirability of properties through association with the improvements. • Improved aesthetic appeal of properties within the Zones providing a positive representation of the area. • Enhanced adaptation of the urban environment within the natural environment from atlequate green space and landscaping. • Environmental enhancement through improved erosion resistance, and dust and debris control. • Increased sense of pride in ownership of property within the District resulting from well-maintained improvements associated with the properties. • Reduced criminal acfivity and property-related crimes (especially vandalism} against properties in the District through well-maintained surroundings and amenities including abatement of graffiti. • Enhanced environmental quality of the parcels within the Zones by moderating temperatures, providing oxygenation antl attenuating noise. The special benefits of street lighting are the convenience, safety and security of property, improvements and goods. Specifically: • Enhanced deterrence of crime and the aid to police protection. • Increased nighttime safety on roads and highways. • Improved ability of pedestrians and motorists to see. • Improved ingress and egress to property. • Reduced vandalism and other criminal acts and damage to improvements or property. • Improved traffic circulation and reduced nighttime accidents and personal property loss. � Increased promotion of business during nighttime hours in the case of commercial properties. The preceding special benefits contribute to a specific enhancement and desirability of each of the assessed parcels. Willdan Financial Services Page 17 Consolidated Palm Desert Landscaping and Lighting Maintenance Assessment District Engineer's Report Fiscal Year 2010/2011 Genera/Benefits Prior to the passage of Proposition 218, some of the District assessments inciuded maintenance of landscaped medians on various arterial streets within the City. However, since the maintenance of most arterial medians within the City were funded by the City's General Fund, it was determined that the existing assessments for these improvements were not a special benefit and in Fiscal Year 1997/98 the District assessments related to arterial medians were eliminated. In addition, any improvement and the associated costs that are considered a general benefit to properties outsitle the respective Zones or to the public at large have been identified and eliminatetl from the annual assessments. In making this tletermination it should be noted that parkway, perimeter landscaping and interior landscaping within the City is either funded and maintained by individual property owners or through some type of association, except those maintained and funded through a special District. The City does not usually maintain these types of improvements from General Funtl Revenues antl, like other similar improvements within the City, the ongoing maintenance of these improvements are a special benefit to the properties associated with the improvements. C. Assessment Methodology Pursuant to the 1972 Act, the costs of the District may be apportioned by any formula or method that fairly distributes the net amount to be assessed, among assessable parcels in proportion to the estimated benefits to be received by each such parcel from the improvements. The apportionment of costs used for each Zone should reflect the composition of the parcels, and the improvements and services provided based on each parcel's estimated special benefit. Equivalent Benefit Units: To assess benefits equitably, it is necessary to relate the different type of parcel improvements to each other. The Equivalent Benefit Unit method of assessment apportionment uses the single-family home as the basic unit of assessment. A single family home equals one Equivalent Benefit Unit (EBU). Every other land use is converted to EBUs based on an assessment formula that equates the property's specific development status, type of development (land use), and size of the property, as compared to a single-family home(SFR). The EBU method of apportioning benefit is typically seen as the most appropriate and equitable assessment methodology for districts formed under the 1972 Act, as the benefit to each parcel from the improvements are apportioned as a function of land use type, size and development. Assessed parcels within Zones 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8, 9, 11, 14, 15 and 16 are single-family residential parcels and the application of the EBU method of spread results in an equal assessment. The following table reflects the various property types and applicable EBUs that may be applied to properties within Zone 13. LAND USE/EQUIVALENT BENEFIT UNITS(Zone 13) Willdan Financral Seivices Page 18 Consolidated Palm Desert Landscaping and Lighting Maintenance Assessment District Engineer's Report Fiscal Year 2010/2011 Land EBU Use Type Multiplier to Property Type Code Factor Calculate EBU Commercial COM 6.00 Acreage Residential and Commercial Vacant VAC 0.30 Acreage - -- - _ -- -- Single Family Residential SFR 1.00 Units Condominiums CON 0.80 Units Single Family Vacant Lot SFV 1.00 Lot Exempt 1�30N 0.00 Parcels Exempt parceis include easements and landscaped areas or common areas. The benefit formula applied to parceis in each Zone is based on the preceding Equivalent Benefit Unit (EBU) tables. Each parcel's EBU correlates the parcel's special benefit received as compared to the other parcels in the Zone. Pa�ce/lype EBUx Ac�es o�Unifs=Parce/EBU Tofa/Ba/ance to Levy in Zone/Tota/EBUin Zone=Levy per EBU Pa�cel EBUx Levy per EBU=Pa�ce/LevyAmount D. Assessment Range Formula Any new or increase in assessments, require certain noticing and meeting requirements by law. The Brown Act defines the terms "new or increased assessment" to exclude certain conditions. These certain conditions included "any assessment that does not exceed an assessment formula or range of assessments previously adopted by the agency or approved by the voters in the area where the assessment is imposed." This definition was later confirmed by Senate Bill 919 (the Proposition 218 implementing legislation). An assessment range formula for the District assessments has been confirmed through property owner ballot proceedings in compliance with Article XIIID, except those existing assessments within the District which qualified as exempt assessments pursuant to Article XIIID, Section 5 of the Constitution and did not require a ballot proceeding under the provisions of Section 4. The assessment range formula shall be applied to the future assessments within the District. The following describes this assessment range formula: Wherein, if the proposed assessment (levy per unit or rate) is less than or equal to, the prior year's maximum assessment plus the adjustments described in the following, then the proposed assessment is not considered an increased assessment. The purpose of establishing an assessment range formula is to provide for reasonable increases and inflationary adjustments to the assessment amounts without requiring costly noticing and mailing procedures, which would be added to the District costs and assessments. Wil/dan Financial Services Page 19 Consolidated Palm Desert Landscaping and Lighting Maintenance Assessment District Engineer's Report Fiscal Year 2010/2011 If the proposed assessment is less than the maximum assessment approved in the previous fiscal year adjusted by a percentage no greater than three percent (3.0%), or the annual percentage increase of the Consumer Price Index (CPI), whichever is the lesser of the two, the assessment shall not be considered as an increase. Each year the City shal� compute the percentage difference between the CPI on January 1, of each year and the CPI for the previous January 1, or a similar time period, as determined by the Bureau of Labor Statistics for all urban consumers for the Los Angeles, Anaheim and Riverside Area. This percentage difference shall then establish the range of increased assessments allowed based on CPI. Should the Bureau of Labor Statistics revise such index or discontinue the preparation of such index, the City shall use the revised index or comparable system as approvetl by the City Council for determining fluctuations in the cost of living. If CPI is less than three percent(3.0%), then the allowable adjustment to the maximum assessment for each Zone may be by CPI, or a lesser percentage. If CPI is greater than three percent(3.0%), then the allowable atljustment to the proposetl assessment for each Zone may be three percent (3.0%) or a lesser percentage. The fact that an assessment range formula is adopted for District assessments does not require that the adjustment be applied each year, nor does it restnct the assessments to the adjustment amount. If the budget and assessments for a given Zone do not require an increase or the increase is less than the allowable adjustment then the required budget and assessment shall be applied. if the budget and assessments for a given Zone require an increase greater than the allowable adjustment then the proposed assessment is considered an increased assessment and mailed notices, as weil as property owner protest baliots are required by Article XIIID to impose the assessment increase. Willdan FinancialSeivices Page 20 Consolidated Palm Desert Landscaping and Lighting Maintenance Assessment District Engineer's Report Fiscal Year 2010/2011 IV. DISTRICT BUDGETS A. Description of Budget Items The foliowing describes the services and costs that are funded through the District, shown in the District Budgets. DIRECT COSTS: Maintenance Costs — Includes contracted labor, material and equipment required to properly maintain the landscaping, irrigation systems, drainage systems, fencing, and entry monuments within the Zone. Landscape Uti/ities—Inclutles utility costs for water required to irrigate landscaped areas and the utility costs for electricity required to run irrigation systems and ornamenta� lighting for landscaped areas. Landscape Extras— Includes the replacement of any materials and equipment needed to make repairs to irrigation systems. T�ee Pruning— Includes the cost of trimming and pruning trees located within the landscaped area. Street Lighting — Utility costs for electricity required to operate streetlights, as well as the maintenance of the streetlights. Specia/District Services—These are services provided to a specific Zone that are outside the normal maintenance services provided by the District. These costs and services may include, but are not limited to the following: � Specialized maintenance and equipment necessary for landscaped areas and appurtenant facilities associated with dry wells, retention basins and detention basins within the Zone. • The additional cost of contracted labor, material and equipment required for trimming trees in the public right of way and landscaped areas. Maintenance Repairs—This item includes repairs that are generally unforeseen and not normally included in the yearly maintenance contract costs. This may include repair of damaged amenities due to vandalism, storms, frost, etc. Also included may be planned upgrades that provide a direct benefit to the Zone. These upgrades could include replacing plant materials and/or renovation of irrigation or lighting systems. Willdan Financia/Services Page 21 Consolidated Palm Desert Landscaping and Lighting Maintenance Assessment District Engineer's Report Fiscal Year 2010/2011 ADMINISTRATION COSTS: District Administration— The cost to particular departments and staff of the City, for providing the coordination of District services and operations, response to public concems and education, as well as procedures associated with the levy and collection of assessments, This item also includes the costs of contracting with professionals to provide administrative, �egal or engineering services specific to the District including required notices, mailings or property owner protest ballot proceedings. County Administration Fee — This is the cost to the Zone for the County to collect District assessments on the property tax bil�s. County Per Pa�ce/Fee—This is the cost to each Zone for the County to collect assessments on the property tax bills. This charge is on a per assessment basis and is in addition to the County Administration Fee. Note: - The administ�afive costs of the District are borne by each Zone in p�opo�tion to the aggregate costs of the enti�e Dist�ict. Costs related to direct administration are identified as exempt, general and special bene�ts in the same proporfion as the benefit finding for the Direct Ser�ice costs. All costs related to the levy of assessments such as county fees and contract administration are applied to each Zone regardless of any benefit�ndings(no gene�al benefitJ. LEVY BREAKDOWN: Reserve Col%tioN(Transfer� The Reserve Account item is provided for collection by the District of funds to operate the Zone from the time period of July 1 (beginning of the fiscal year) through approximately January when the County provides the City with the first instal�ment of assessments collected from the property tax bills. Negative amounts shown for these budget items are transfers from the reserve fund that are used to reduce the Balance to Levy. The Reserve Fund eliminates the need for the City to transfer funds from non-District accounts. Other Revenues/General Fund Confribufion— This item includes additional funds designated for the Zone that are not from District assessments. These funds are added to the Zone account to reduce assessments, and may be from either non-District or District sources including City General Fund Contributions and interest earnings. Balance to Levy— This is the total amount to be collected for the current fiscal year through assessments (for special benefits) or from other revenue sources (for general benefits). The Balance to Levy represents the sum of Total Direct and Administration Costs, the Reserve Account/Other Revenue Source,the Beginning Balance, and the Contribution Replenishment. Only those costs related to the improvements identified as special benefits are levied antl collected on the tax rolL Willdan Financial Services Page 22 Consolidated Palm Desert Landscaping and Lighting Maintenance Assessment District Engineer's Report Fiscal Year 2010/2011 DISTRICT STATISTICS: TotalPa�cels—The totai number of parcels within the Zone boundary. Total Parce/s Levied— The total number of parcels within the Zone that are assessed. Non- assessable lots or parcels may include parcels of land principally encumbered by public right-of- ways, easements, common areas, and/or parcels within the boundaries of the Zone that currently do not benefit from the improvements due possibly to development restrictions. Total Equivalent Benefit Units (EBU) — Equivalent Benefit Unit (EBU) is a numeric value calculated for each parcel based on the parcel's land use and size. The EBU shown in the Zone budget, (Section IV B), represents the sum totai of the parcel EBUs that receive speciai benefits from the improvements. Levy per EBU—This amount represents the rate being applietl to each parcel's individual EBU. The Levy per Equivalent Benefit Unit is the result of dividing the total Balance to Levy, by the sum of the Zone EBUs, for the fiscal year. Willdan Financial Seivices Page 23 Consolidated Palm Desert Landscaping and Lighting Maintenance Assessment District Engineer's Report Fiscal Year 2010/2011 B. District Budgets N W � `. W � C9 N > � a w � � W � � � � o � � N W Wcn z � W N o a > � � � wo � Y- Y LLI p � f- � W � Z Q ? Q W Q � O W U � d 0 tn d � � Zone 02 Zone 03 Zone 04 Zone 05 DM Zone 05 SC Zone 05 PR Zone O6 MM Maintenance Costs 27,800 3,335 0 6,138 0 2,389 884 Landscape Utilities(WaterlElectrical) 35,582 1,222 0 1,572 0 834 350 La�tlscape Extras(MaterialslSpecial Maintenance) 2,059 1,111 0 613 0 415 388 Tree Pruning 9,817 445 0 1,446 0 499 478 Street Lighting 277 777 2,780 499 1,222 166 445 AnnualDirectCosts(Subtotal) 75,535 6,890 2,780 10,268 1,222 4,303 2,545 DistrictAdministration 7,751 1,749 1;574 1,549 855 1,186 937 County Fees 113 67 88 15 21 19 20 Adminrstration Costs(SubtotalJ 7,864 1,816 1,662 1,564 876 1,205 957 TotalOperatingCosts 83,399 6,706 4,442 11,831 1,098 5,508 3,502 Misc Expenses 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Reserve Fund Coliection 0 0 310 0 0 0 0 General Benefit Contribution(General Fund) (61,478) 0 (504) (1,775) 0 0 0 CevyAdjustments(SubfotalJ 61478 0 (194) 1775 0 0 0 Balance To Levy 21,921 8,706 4,248 10,057 2,098 5,508 3,502 District Statistics Parcels Levietl 222 132 172 29 41 37 40 Total Equivalent Be�efit Units(EBU) 222 133.20 172 29 41 37 40 Ma�cimum Rate per EBU 98.7490 71.0339 24.7004 424.2835 58.0662 195.3553 98.7494 Appiietl Rate EBU 98.7428 65.3604 24.7002 346.7931 51.1107 148.8649 87.5500 $ 0.006 $ 5.674 $ 0.000 $ 77,490 $ 6.896 $ 46.490 $ 11.199 Estimated B innin Reseroe Balance-June 30,2010 2,633 15,699 236 30,052 6,302 16,493 5,005 Reserve Fund CollectionlContribution 0 0 310 0 0 0 0 Estimated Endin Reserve Balance-June 30,2011 2,633 15,699 74 30,052 6,302 16,493 5,005 (1)Designales a 15°/a General Benefit for Direct and Administative Fees Willdan Financral Seivices Page 24 Consolidated Palm Desert Landscaping and Lighting Maintenance Assessment District Engineer's Report Fiscal Year 2010I2011 z 0 v� ~ W V -- � W Z Q 'J _ J J t/) � Q Q t9 w - = V � g � >- a a � o 0 W W H H W J J J J a a J Q Q ! � Z Z � d d O O O O O Q Q 2 S tn N S J J Zone O6 HG Zone 06 HE Zone O6 S1 Zone O6 S2 Zone O6 HC Zone O6 Li Zone O6 L2 Maintenance Costs 2,201 2,834 2,679 5,155 1,855 2,694 2,901 Landscape Utilities(WatedElectrical) 916 1,178 1,113 2,146 1,333 1,121 1,092 Landscape Extras(MaterialslSpeciai Maintenance) 445 499 499 610 111 499 499 Tree Pruning 769 637 660 1,620 334 499 449 Street Lighting 0 166 166 277 277 166 166 AnnualDirectCosts(Subtotal) 4,331 5,314 5,117 9,808 3,910 4,979 5,107 District Administration 947 998 1,009 1,767 1,537 998 1,037 County Fees 8 8 8 48 19 8 8 Administration Casts(Suhtotal) 955 1,006 1,017 1,815 1,556 1,006 1,045 TotalOpera(ingCosts 5,286 6,320 6,134 11,623 5,466 5,985 6,152 Misc Expenses 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Reserve Fund Coilection 0 D 0 0 0 0 0 General Benef�Contribution(General Fund) (793) 0 (920) 0 (3� 0 0 LevyAdjusfinents(Subfotal J 793 0 920 0 3 0 0 Balance To Levy 4,493 6,320 5,214 11,623 5,463 5,985 6,152 District Statistics Parcels Levied 16 16 16 94 38 16 16 Total Equivalent Benefit Units(EBU) 16 16 16 94 38 16 16 Maximum Rate per EBU 316.6664 446.0222 367.8636 139.2288 143.7643 422.1531 434.5757 Applied Rate EBU 280.8188 395.0000 325.8688 123.6489 143.7632 374.0625 384.5000 $ 35.848 $ 51.022 $ 41.995 $ 15.580 $ 0.001 $ 48.091 $ 50.076 Estimated B inni Reserve Balance-June 30,2010 7,880 10,954 9,151 20,068 7,770 10,375 10,668 Reserve Fund CollectionlContribution 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Estimated Endin Reserve Balance-June 30,2011 7,880 10,954 9,151 20,068 7,770 10,375 10,668 (1)Designates a 15°/a General Beneiit for Direct and Administative Fees Willdan Financial Seivices Page 25 Consolidated Palm Desert Landscaping and Lighting Maintenance Assessment District Engineer's Report Fiscal Year 2010/2011 � � � � N � o W � � = c� � � � �- � a nc � �" a � o � w m � � � � �� Z o � a 0 � J�' 0 U Z � Z Z !� � � � Q Q J V� cn S C� G a 'S Zone O6 L3 Zone O6 SP Zone 06 SW Zone O6 HW Zone O6 DB Zone O6 PC Zone 01 Maintenance Costs 1,614 2,361 2,361 2,557 2,223 2,223 3,123 Landscape Utilities(WatedElectrical) 767 1,455 1,455 888 445 556 667 Landscape Extras(MaterialslSpecial Maintenance) 388 499 499 784 334 445 445 Tree Pruning 388 649 601 613 222 222 445 Street Lighting 166 166 166 334 166 166 0 AnnualDir�tCosts(Subfotal) 3,323 5,130 5,082 5,176 3,390 3,612 4,680 DistrictAdministration 870 1,009 1,009 1,115 1,229 1,175 1,104 County Fees 8 8 8 8 10 10 8 Administration Costs(SubtotalJ 878 1,017 1,017 1,123 1,239 1,185 1,112 Total Op�ating Costs 4,201 6,147 6,099 6,299 4,629 4,797 5,792 Misc Ezpenses 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Reserve Fund Collection 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 General Benef�Contribution(General Fund) 0 0 0 (945i 0 0 0 LevyAdjustments(Subtotal) 0 0 0 �9451 0 0 0 Balance To Lery 4,201 6,147 6,099 5,354 4,629 4,797 5,792 District Statistics Parcels Levied 15 16 16 16 20 20 16 Total Equivalent Benefit Un�s(EBU) 15 16 16 16 20 20 16 Maximum Rate per EBU 316.8193 433.5837 4302622 334.7026 425.6275 295.6378 486.1593 Applied Rate EBU 280.0667 384.1875 381.1875 334.6344 231.4500 239.8500 362.0000 $ 36.753 $ 49.396 $ 49.075 $ 0.068 $ 194.177 $ 55.788 $ 124.159 Estimated B innin Reserve Balance-June 30,2010 6,011 10,658 10,324 7,622 6,618 6,857 17,799 Reserve Fund CollectionlContribution 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Estimated Endin Reserve Balance-June 30,2011 6,011 10,658 10,324 7,622 6,618 6,857 17,799 (1)Designates a 15%General Benefit for Direct and Administative fees Willdan Financial Sen�ices Page 26 Consolidated Palm Desert Landscaping and Lighting Maintenance Assessment District Engineer's Report Fiscal Year 2010/2011 m w � � U � � a V � N �S J � � W W W W a. � � W � �_ H � F- � y U - Q Q J Z �W z �W U' � O � Q 0 C� W � � � � m� >- �a J W � V J Z J~ a x o o °�a a o v, a � a. a Ya U UW Zone 08 Zone 09 Zone 11 Zone 13 Zone 14 Zone 15 Zone 16 CV Maintenance Cos� 833 8,895 2,549 12,955 11,304 5,559 6,671 Landscape Utilities(WaterlElectncal) 334 3,113 1,191 2,698 2,935 834 2,223 Landscape Extras(MaterialslSpecial Maintenance) 334 1,778 388 1,618 648 445 888 Tree Pruning 0 5,670 111 1,618 2,283 333 987 Street Lighting 333 2,223 0 22,672 323 0 388 AnnualDir�tCosts(SubtotalJ 1,834 21,679 4,239 41,561 17,493 7,171 11,157 DistnctAdministration 1,098 2,685 963 15,934 2,891 1,551 1,698 County Fees 19 54 12 927 83 34 16 Administratian Costs(SubtatalJ 1,117 2,739 975 16,861 2,974 1,585 1,714 TofalOperating Cosfs 2,951 24,418 5,214 58,422 20,467 8,756 12,871 Misc Ezpenses 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 ReseNe Fund Collection 0 0 0 (5,892) 0 0 0 General Benefit Contribution(General Fund) 0 0 (158) 0 (3,070) 0 (1,931) LevyAd%ustments(Subtotal) 0 0 158 5 892 3(_07� 0 (1,� Balance To Le 2,951 24,418 5,056 52,530 17,397 8,756 10,940 District Statistics Parcels Levied 37 105 23 1,818 163 67 32 Totai Equivalent Benefit Units(EBU) 37 105 23 2,327.33 163 67 32 Maximum Rate per EBU 80.6315 2382929 219.8552 32.4256 1342350 175.4104 513.0872 Applied Rate EBU 79.7568 232.5524 219.8261 22.5709 106.7298 130.6866 341.8859 $ 0.875 $ 5.740 $ 0.029 $ 9.855 $ 27.505 $ 44.724 $ 171201 Es�mated Be innin Reserve Balance-June 30,2010 1,153 45,418 17,179 164,175 54,188 16,260 34,373 Reserve Fund CollecfionlContribution 0 0 0 5,892 0 0 0 Estimated Endin Reserve Balance-June 30,2011 1,153 45,418 17,179 158,283 54,188 16,260 34,373 (1J Designates a 15°�General Benefit for Direct and Administative Fees Willdan Financial Sen�ices ' Page 27 Consolidated Palm Desert Landscaping and Lighting Maintenance Assessment District Engineer's Report Fiscal Year 2010/2011 � � � � v � w y N � W W w W � _- W � J J z �W a z � � a ,,,,, � Z a o 0 � J Q � p m 1-- Z J �--. � Z W J � O N W � = o� N U W d y �- J Zone 16 SD Zone 16 CV1 Zone 16 P1 Zone 16 SE Zone 16 BD District Maintenance Costs 3,239 4,857 3,239 2,698 1,920 142,048 Lantlscape Utilities(WateriElectrical) 1,667 1,987 1,610 1,109 599 74,994 Landscape Extras(MaterialslSpecial Maintenancej 888 888 888 855 855 21,610 Tree Pruning 989 989 989 499 499 35,758 Street Lighting 388 386 386 222 166 36,030 Annual Direct Costs(SubtofalJ 7,171 9,107 7,112 5,383 4,039 310,440 DistrictAdministration 1,788 1,757 1,757 1,086 1,085 65,701 County Fees 16 16 16 7 8 1,721 Administration Costs(Subtotal) 1,804 1,773 1,773 1,093 1,093 67,422 TotalOperatrng Costs 8,975 10,880 8,885 6,476 5,132 377,862 Misc Expenses 0 0 0 0 0 0 Reserve Funtl Collection 0 0 0 0 0 (5,582) General Benefit Contribution(General Fund) 0 (1,632) (1,333) (971) 0 (75,513) LevyAdjustments(Subfotal) 0 1j 631 1333 971 0 (81,094) BalanceToLevy 8,975 9,248 7,552 5,505 5,132 296,768 0 District Statistics 0 Parcels Levied 32 32 32 14 16 3,375 Total Equivalent Benefit Units(EBU) 32 32 32 14 16 3,885.53 Maximum Rate per EBU 498.1429 369.1461 327.6847 523.1272 363.3280 Applied Rate EBU 280.4688 289.0000 236.0078 393.1857 320.7500 $ 217.674 $ 80.146 $ 91.677 $ 129.942 $ 42.578 Estimated Be innin Reserve Balance-June 30,2010 28,212 38,517 23,741 17,328 16,169 Reserve Fund CoilectionlContribution 0 0 0 0 0 Estimated Endin Reseroe Balance-June 30,2011 28,212 38,517 23,741 17,328 16,169 0 (1)Designafes a 15%General Benefit for Direct and Administa6ve Fees Willdan Financra/Sen�ices paye 2g Consolidated Palm Desert Landscaping and Lighting Maintenance Assessment District Engineer's Report Fiscal Year 2010/2011 Appendix A— District Boundary Maps The Boundary Maps for the District and/or Zones are on file in the office of Public Works and are by reference made part of this Report. The Boundary Maps are also available for inspection at the Office of Public Works. Willdan Financial Sen�ices Page 29 Consolidated Palm Desert Landscaping and Lighting Maintenance Assessment District Engineer's Report Fiscal Year 2010/2011 Appendix B — 201012011 Assessment Roll Parcel identification, for each lot or parcel within the District, shall be the parcel as shown on the Riverside County Assessor's map for the year in which this Report is prepared. Non-assessable lots or parcels may include areas of public streets and other roadways (typically not assigned an APN by the County); dedicated public easements, open space areas and rights-of-ways including public greenbelts and parkways; utility rights-of-ways; common areas; landlocked parcels, small parcels vacated by the County, bifurcated lots, and any other property that cannot be developed. These types of parcels are considered to receive little or no benefit from the improvements and are therefore exempted from assessment. Properties outside the District boundary receive no direct or special benefits from the improvements provided by the District and are not assessed. Parcel identification, for each lot or parcel within the District, shall be the parcel as shown on the Riversitle County Assessor's map for the year in which this Report is prepared. The land use classification for each parcel is based on the Riverside County Assessor's Roll. A listing of parcels assessed within this District, along with the proposed assessment amounts, shall be submitted to the City Clerk, under a separate cover, and by reference is made part of this Report. Approval of this Report (as submitted or as modified) confirms the method of apportionment and the maximum assessment rate to be levied against each eligible parcel and thereby constitutes the approved levy and collection of assessments for the fiscal year. The parcels and the amount of assessment to be levied shall be submitted to the County AuditorlController and included on the property tax roll for the fiscal year. If any parcel submitted for collection is identified by the County Auditor/Controller to be an invalid parcel number for the current fiscal year, a corrected parcel number andlor new parcel numbers will be identified and resubmitted to the County Auditor/Controller. The assessment amount to be levied and collected for the resubmitted parcel or parcels shall be based on the method of apportionment and assessment rate approved in this Report. Therefore, if a single parcel has changed to multiple parcels, the assessment amount applied to each of the new parcels shall be recalculated and applied according to the approved method of apportionment and assessment rate rather than a proportionate share of the original assessment. Willdan Financial Sen�ices Page 30 MINUTES REGULAR PALM DESERT CiTY COUNCIL MEETiNG MARCH 25, 2004 Ms. LaRocca responded that this would amend the partion that provided for — the types of uses that the money could be spent for. Prior to this,they could only be spent for rental subsidy, and this resolution would expand the ability to use the funds for other housing purposes. Upon questian by Mayor Spiegel, she responded that there was no increase to the developer. Councilman Ferguson moved to waive further reading and adopt Resolution No. 04-21. Motion was seconded by Kelly and carried by a 5-0 vote. XIII. ORDINANCES For Introduction: None For Adoption: None XIV. NEW BUSINESS A. REQUEST FOR AUTHORIZATION TO FORM LANDSCAPE AND �— LfGHTING DlSTRICTS FOR SEVEN EXISTING SINGLE-FAMILY TRACTS (THE BOULOERS, SUNDANCE EAST, PETUNIA f, PETUNIA II, PALM COURT, COLLEGE VIEW ESTATES, AND JERI LANE). Mr. Ortega noted the staff report and recommendation in the packets. Councilman Ferguson asked what would happen if the people decided they wanted to have these districts and the City Cauncil were to decide not to proceed. Senior Management Analyst Martin Alvarez responded that this would go right back to the issue staff is trying to address now,with neither landscaping and Iighting districts nor homeowners associations(HOA)since homeowners associations required unanimous approval of property owners, and the existing property owners did not wish to have such HOA's. Councilman Ferguson stated it was his understanding the City was in this situation because the developers automatically assumed the City was going ta do landscape and lighting districts and put this in the DRE report. When the City denied formation of these districts, the developers went back to the homeowners to see if they were willing to pay for this via HOA's, and the __ homeowners objected. Now the City is going back and asking homeowne�s 7 MINUTES REGULAR PALM DESERT CITY COUNCIL MEETiNG MARCH 25, 2004 if they want their property taxes assessed for districts which the Council already said it did not want to do. -- Mr. Alvarez agreed this was correct. MR.GARY RICHARD,World Development,44-600 Village Court,stated that with regard to Councilman Ferguson's comment that the developers "assumed"the City was going to do districts, it was his understanding that a condition of approval for his project was that they form either an HOA or a landscape and lighting assessment district,and they had an optian to do one or the other. At the time, their management decided to form a landscape and lighting assessment district as has been done in the past, and they put up $5,000 in bond money for one five-acre tract and $1Q,000 for a ten-acre tract for a total of$15,000. He said in good faith it was their understanding the district would be processed. He noted that in the process of selling,they had to file a DRE report which has to be processed in three different stages, and at the time they told the buyers there would not be an HOA. When the Council turned down forrnation of the district, they went through three different mailings to residents in those communities to explain to them the quandary they were now in. Although they received varied responses, they would have to have had 100% approval in order to form an HOA. He added that these subdivisions were completely sold out,and he was concerned that there was still no mechanism to take care of the offsite landscaping. He � suggested that if the Courtcil was going to direct that there be no more landscape and lighting assessment districts,it should be done from this point forward and not on those projects that were being approved up to that point. These subdivisions were a{ready in process when the Council voted not to approve any more such districts. MS. CHRIS McSHAFFREY,74-Q129 Chinook Circle, presenteci a petition to the Council signed by 12 out of 14 homeowners on her street, one of the subdivisions that is currently not being maintained by the City(on file in the City C(erk's Office). She said when she purchased her property, there was a disclosure statement provided by the developer which indicated there would be a landscaping and lighting district and that the assessment would be included in their property taxes. She noted that she had closed escrow on her property in January of 2003,and the City abandoned this landscaping and lighting district in Navember of 2003 without any notification whatsoever to the homeowners. She found out about the situation when she calied to ask why their landscaping strip was not being maintained, and it was explained it was currently in limbo; the water was being maintained by the City, but there was no maintenance of the landscaping. She added that her home was in the third phase of the subdivision, and the first and second phases were being maintained by the City. _ 8 MINUTES REGULAR PALM DESERT CITY COUNCIL MEETING MARCH 25, 2004 Councilman Kelly said it was his understanding that particular assessment --- district was one they voted not to have. If that is the case, it should have been explained;if that is not the case,he would like an explanafion from staff as to what went wrong. Mayor Pro Tem Crites stated that they never voted on having or not having a landscape and lighting district. This came about when the Council said it did not want to have any such districts. In the past, there were quite a few of these where it ended up that the homeowners were neither willing to pay assessments nor take care of the maintenance themselves,and it had been nothing but a mess. The City decided it wanted out of the business of forming more landscape and fighting districts. These particular subdivisions under discussion tonight were in process when the City decided not to have any more districts, and the developers were asked to form HOA's. He stated that the Council could vate to send out to a ballot the formation of a landscape and lighting district for these particu{ar tracts only. Councilman Ferguson said it was his understanding that the bind the City got into was not formation of the districts themselves; it was when the cost of providing the levef of maintenance went up, the City had to come back and seek an increase in the assessments, the homeowners objected, and the City ended up subsidizing the maintenance. He said the maintenance could — be done through an HOA,where the homeowners control the money and the leve! of service, or they could agree to an assessment with automatic esca(ators that cover the actual cost of maintaining the service of the landscaping, with homeowners having an indeterminate amount assessed on the tax ro{Is and the City cantral{ing it. Either way,the residents are going to have to pay for their own landscaping of the common areas in their subdivisions. He said if the homeowners preferred that the City assess them on their property taxes,with the caveat that the assessment amounts will rise as the City's costs rise, and the City will be made whole, he was wil(ing to go that route. MS. MCSHAFFREY said she understood if the Council were to approve this district, there would be a meeting with the homeowners, costs would be discussed, homeowners would have to apprave the costs of the maintenance,and the costs would be included in property taxes. She noted that the district was a condition of the subdivision map. There is a new tract of 16 homes going in behind her, to the south of Chinook Circle, and when that tract map was approved it was required that a HOA be formed. The process is working for the new tracts, but there is a problem with the existing ones. Upon question by Councilman Ferguson, she responded that the devefoper of her tract never came back to her about forming an HOA on her __ street. However, that was in Novembe� of 2003, and most of the hames 9 MINUTES REGULAR PALM DESERT CITY COUNCIL MEETING MARCH 25, 2004 closed escrow in January or February 2003, and it was her understanding once the developer completes the subdivision, he no longer is involved. —~ Mr. Ortega said it was his understanding the current law with regard ta assessment districts allowed for putting language in the ballot regarding future increases in the amount of the assessments, and staff would so do with these ballots. Councilman Ferguson noted the staff recommendation was for authorization to form these assessment districts. He asked if staff meant to move forward with the voting process and then based on those votes form the districts. Mayor Spiegel asked whether or not the districts were already formed. Mr. Alvarez responded that the districts were not yet formed, and staff was requesting authorization to proceed with that process, which would include meeting with the residents and going out to ballot. Mayor Pro Tem Crites moved to, by Minute Motion: 1) Authorize staff to proceed with the process to form seven Landscape and Lighting Districts for existing singfe-family tracts, including language in the ballot materials that provides for future increases in the amount of the assessments; 2) continue to require all new single-family tracts to form homeowners associations to maintain the perimeter landscaping areas. Motion was � seconded by Ferguson and carried by a 5-0 vote. B. REQUEST FOR APPROVAL OF THE 2004"SUMMER OF FUN" CONCERT AND MOVIE SERIES. Mr. Ortega noted the staff report and recommendation in the packets. Mayor Pro Tem Crites moved to, by Minute Motion, approve the following for the 2004 "Summer of Fun" Concert and Movie Series: 1) The attached lineup — funds are avaifable in Account No. 110-4416-414-3061; 2) a purchase order in the amount of $9,687.50 with Live Oak Audio Visual,Seattle,Washington,for movies,professional staff, and audio visual equipment;3)a purchase order in the amount of$15,100 with Musicians Outlet Rental Equipment,Palm Desert,Caiifomia,for pro#essional staff,sound,and lighting equipment at the concerts; 4) a purchase order in the amount of $6,148 with Pyro Spectaculars by Souza, Inc., Rialto, California, to provide a five-minute fireworks display at the conclusion of the September 2, 2004, concert; 5) a purchase order in the amount of $27,500 with Pyro Spectaculars by Souza, Inc., Rialta, California, for the Independence Day Celebration fireworks display; 6) the following concert contracts, as presented, and the Mayor to execute same: a) C T C M u s i c — $1 ,5 0 0 — C o n t ra c t No. C22530A; b) Steve Madaio & Friends — $6,500 — Cantract No. C225308; c) Kal David & The ReaV Deal, Featuring Lauri Bono — $2,000 — Contract No. C22530C; .., d) Silverado — $1,600 — Contract No. C22530D; e) Upstream — $2,000 — Contract 10