-->
South Poway Votes
Questions and Answers –District 1
1. District Elections
A. Do you think the district elections are a positive or negative thing for Poway voters? Please explain your thinking.
B. Would you support a 4 district citizen’s commission to redraw/rebalance the district boundaries after the 2020 census or would you prefer that the council members do it? Again, please explain your thinking.
Dave Grosch-declined to participate
Jon Ryan- https://ryan4poway.com
A. Yes, as a Heritage Hills resident I believe districts are a positive for Poway as they allow local representation and specifically to Poway, allow better representation for those in the southern part of Poway that is typically smaller houses and increased density with lower incomes than the northern part of Poway, which is typically larger houses, less dense neighborhoods and has higher overall income. Due to geography and roadways, those in North Poway might tend to only drive on Espola/Racho Bernardo and shop/spend time more in Rancho Bernardo and might not even spend much time in South Poway at all so traffic, parking and density on Poway Rd might not concern a N Poway resident much, while they are huge issues for South Poway. Likewise South Poway might mostly drive Poway Road with the traffic and parking issues in the neighborhoods that do not have enough parking spaces for apartments overflowing into the the neighborhoods or the problems with putting thousands of new homes onto an already extremely busy road. South Poway residents might not care much about the issues with Stoneridge, but for North Poway, it is an eyesore and the lack of something like tennis courts and other facilities is a big issue. While district representatives will ultimately make decisions for all Poway, it is good to have people who actually live in the neighborhoods and can feel the pain of a new apartment building with too little parking (as was just approved by the new Poway Corridor Plan) that then have the extra cars parked in front of their homes and that should not be there, but in the apartment complexes as part of the building and planning process. One of the main reasons I am running is because I believe that historically South Poway has not been represented as well as the North, and as a result, we are moving away from the “City in the Country”, not preserving it and planning for more developments. more density and less “Country”. We all Need more restaurants, but we don’t want More Traffic! We need to plan to keep Poway the City in the Country, not the City.
B. Because we are using the mayor’s map for the district and with recent events including the council voting unanimously for a 3 month resident to be made Councilmember over several other long term Poway residents, everything that has been done is suspect. If nothing else, an independent commission with residents from all of the Poway areas, should at least take a look at what was done and decide if they agree with it. I would recommend more than just 4 district reps though as this is a case where more eyes are probably better. There is a problem going forward in that if there is a change to the districts, it has knock on effects for future elections and even for voters in this election, so as with so many things in government, undoing what could be a bad or preferential decision may take much more effort and time to retract and fix, then if it had been done differently the first time around. Again, the council used the Mayor’s map, and then the lawsuit is based on the Mayor’s map and the council chose to keep the replacement of member Cunningham at large because in my opinion it works more for their agenda. I would have supported an in district election for District 4, instead of keeping the seat at large, and as a result of that decision by council, it could continue to remain unrepresented by a resident until at least 202o.
For more information on my stance on the issues, please see my website which has issues, a District Map and locator and a blog of my experiences while running to be your District 1 representative. https://ryan4poway.comor call me at 858-668-3399
John Carson-
A. First and foremost, I think Poway deserves representation. From South Poway to the Stone Ridge area. Poway is blessed with a diverse and dynamic population and economic community. All the citizens of Poway make OUR city as wonderful as it is today.
I think the districts are a step in the right direction. I think we may need to look further into the dynamics of citywide leadership and see what we can do to ensure everyone is heard and has the right representation.
B. Whenever given the chance to let the people make decisions that affect them personally I will support those chances as much as possible. However, I am not in support of "commissions" that don't get anything done. To achieve progress and end up with thoughtful, meaningful boundaries in which neighborhoods aren't gerrymandered; I would suggest that time deadlines and goals are provided by council or staff for each meeting of the commission.
Peter Neild-
A. POSITIVE Strongly POSITIVE. This is just one of the reasons I decided to finally run, and in my case District 1, with memories of District 4. This method of establishing representative government is a huge step forward and should have been incorporated at the very start of the City in the Country. One of the first issues that faced our young city was the legacy of our history. We have to live with what we were dealt prior to 1980. In my opinion the Districts as they are now drawn partially address that.
Poway Road and Pomerado Road tie us to the surrounding influences of San Diego, Rancho Bernardo, Ramona, and Lakeside. Even though Hwy 67 and Espola Road were also envisioned to be “pass-through” routes, remember Espola is a contraction of Escondido, Poway, and Lakeside; as is Pomerado a contraction of Poway, Merton, and Bernardo. And now Community Road and Twin Peaks have taken on the role of pass-through routes for our South Poway Business Park. We are forced into dealing with these “routes”; sharing their utility and convenience with our neighbor communities, while we also have to live in/with them.
A second reason I am running for District 1, is that not only does it share a border with District 4 (Poway Road), it partially encompasses part of Pomerado, and it also shares some with District 3 along withTwin Peaks and finally it shares part of Community with District 2. I feel that District representation on the City Council will allow for two people sitting on the City Council to be able to address the issues created by the formative history of our City, to say nothing of the fact that in the case of Poway RoadALL FOUR Districts should have a say (with an emphasis on 1, 3 and of course 4).
When I lived in District 4 at the beginning of my time in Poway (1980-1996), I distinctly remember when the common “feel” amongst my neighbors was that our fate was being handed to us by “Northern Poway” dominance of our City Government. District representation if implemented properly shouldaddress that lingering “feel”. Now that I am “in” District 1 (1996-Present); I think the District 1-4, District 1-2, and District 1-3 relationships can work, at least that would be my focus.
That brings me to part B of the question: B. CITIZEN’S COMMISSION
As you have just read, I feel the Districts as they are now laid out; is a START, which I am in favor of. However, they do need some refinement. Those of you familiar with the application Nextdoor, should be aware that it has divided District 1 into 14 (perhaps 15) neighborhoods. With that in mind, should District 1 be represented by 15 City Council representatives – no. That would be overwhelming for the City Staff (who actually run the city) to deal with, especially if ALL the districts were to be divided similarly. Never-the-less as I have driven through District 1 over the last several weeks, talking to people I came across by happen-chance; there are commonalities of concern. The next 2 to 4 years of this NEWDistricting should allow the people within those Districts to refine their “home” districts. Let me expand upon this graphically:
My location physically at “Ground Zero” of District 1 (as it is at Christmas Time – “Candy Cane Lanes”)should allow easy access to all of my constituents within District 1, to get this rolling. BTW If you see me driving by (picture inset in the map) and I don’t see you; flag me down – I’d love to talk to you.
.
_________________________________________________________
2. Park Needs Assessment
During last Tuesday’s City Council Meeting, City Manager Tina White mentioned that the last time Poway did a park needs assessment was in 2008.
In the 10 years since that last assessment, Poway has added many residents, and the council has approved the Poway Rd Corridor Study, which will add thousands more residents, all without assessing if there are sufficient parks to serve their needs.
A. In your opinion, whose job is it to initiate a park needs assessment?
The council? The city manager? Both? Neither?
B. What kind of maps, data, metrics and other information would you find useful in a park needs assessment ?
C. When discussing park needs, what is of particular concern to you?
Dave Grosch- declined to participate
Jon Ryan-
A. A parks needs assessment should be on the standard plan for the city of Poway. We are falling short on all kinds of maintenance issues and responsibility lies with the City Council and the City Manager. If you do not have needs like this on a calendar with reconsideration planned out, stuff will fall thru the cracks. The city of Poway should have a formalized plan and part of managements job is to work that plan. From taking care of the bathrooms at the city parks, to when to inspect and repair the city piping, its all standard management, part of ongoing maintenance and needs assessment. In this case, if it is on the plan, it has been missed, and if it is not on the plan, then the plan needs to be looked at, have the important items like parks needs assessment scheduled on a routine basis and then the councilmembers need to make sure the city manager and employees are following that plan and take administrative action if they are not. This is their job and their responsibility and why we "hire them" every 4 years.
B. Again, this is not reinventing the wheel. Pretty much every city needs to look toward the future, recognize issues from the past and plan to prevent those issues in the future. It's good management and it saves way more money than waiting till things fall apart and then spending extra money to repair something that would have only cost a third as much to maintain vs. either need volunteer help to fix, or significant capital outlay to repair. We have a plan for parks based on growth in the city plan, why has that not been followed? Why do the citizens have to bring it up to council? Why is that not on the managers calendar?
C. It's no secret that are parks have slid very obviously in the last 4 years. In my 20 years of going to the parks and trails of Poway, even before I was a resident, I have not seen the basic maintenance fall like it has in the last 4 years. What once were jewels are now weed infested dry lands. Trees are dying at several parks and the trash is not emptied till its overflowing. People loved our parks and pictures from a few years ago show how they should look. If nothing else, by complaining about the issue, we might be getting something done, but I don't want the parks to look good just during election season, I want them to look good and be safe all the time!
John Carson-
A. In my estimation, the entirety of the City Council and Staff should be proactively looking for parks assessments. From stormwater collection and reducing urban heat areas, parks benefit almost every department of the City. I agree with many others that park assessments should be a part of the Cities general plan. As a Council member I would work with the other members of the Council to start a biennial park needs assessment added to the General Plan. This every other year assessment would be baselined on the release of the most recent census data (i.e., Census data release in 2010 should have triggered a parks assessment). The census year assessments should review the size and status of the cities parks assets. The off census year assessments should review the status (maint, equip and landscaping) of the cities park assets.
B. If the City does not have a relevant survey of the current park assets, I would encourage staff to start a baseline, “current park assets” survey so that the City can prove and show the people of Poway that we are doing the things they ask us to do. This “survey” would include the city engineer/public works/parks dept. and perhaps a surveying contractor to ensure certain efficiencies while conducting these surveys and not taking away from other city engineer or public works/parks dept. business. The guidelines for how much park Poway needs for every 1000 residents is already set for us in the general plan. I would lean towards not using the current POWGIS maps due to their complexity and non-user friendliness. Whatever maps provided by survey contractors could be loaded via PDF or Visio very easily onto the Poway.orgwebsite.
From a good baseline, the data accumulated by the biennial parks assessments will allow the City of Poway to provide appropriate levels of parks that meet or exceed the city residents needs. Great parks benefit us all.
C. I have a nine year old son, we go to the parks here in Poway a lot! From the Community Park across Poway Road from our house to Old Poway Park and Lake Poway. The one thing I constantly notice are how busy they are. The picnic tables in Old Poway Park are usually spoken for on the weekends by 8 a.m. and the ones in the Community Park are very much the same. (I know you can reserve tables in Old Poway Park.) With how frequently my family goes to the Community Park and Old Poway Park, I can honestly say that they are really busy and perhaps too busy.
Lake Poway on the other hand is a separate animal altogether. The level of congestion at peak times at Lake Poway is unreal. Even paying, non-Poway residents frequent Lake Poway en mass on the weekends. While I appreciate the ability of everyone to enjoy Lake Poway, the congestion makes it hard to enjoy the Lake for all it has to offer.
Maintenance and upkeep of our current parks are of great concern to me too. Currently we have picnic table throughout the Poway parks system that will tear your clothes due to failing concrete construction. We have picnic tables with boards rotted out and taken over by bug infestations. We have equipment at our parks that have not been serviced in many years and if they have, it doesn’t seem like proper maintenance.
We have parks in Poway that cannot be used on HOT summer nights by families due to the park rangers locking the gates to the parks at dusk. Many of those same parks have baseball and softball fields that could also be used at night, allowing for our children to not have to play in the heat of the day. Not having a later time for parks closing is unreasonable and should be changed.
The City of Poway is in dire need of more parks and Parks that fit the needs of the evolving communities around them. If I am elected come November, improving these types of community services will be of utmost importance to me.
Peter Neild -
A and B. Tracking of City Park utilization (need) is a normal function of the City Government organization; that is under constant analysis and appraisal. I have no clue why Tina doesn’t know this. But since the question was asked, I will add that if elected, this will of course be yet another approach as a function of the District Representation. I will work towards encouraging people within the various Districts to stay in touch with their LOCAL Representative of their concerns.
Now note that normal questions and concerns about existing issues within the City should be directed to the appropriate department in the City Government. Certainly the District Representative (Council Person) should be informed. And most definitely brought to their attention IF the answer or position taken by the City management is not to their satisfaction. IF the corrective action is something new or a large change to the City – then the City Council person works with the other District Representation to propose a solution.
As to the “maps, data and metrics” – all that is needed, exists. In my case being a scientist; I analyze the living daylights out of just about anything brought to my attention. When I “publish” my Campaign Facebook Page, I will put a “note” there that will use this question about population impact on Parks as an example.
So the answer to A and B is – BOTH. But of course only escalated to the City Manager’s level; if satisfaction by the particular department’s staff can’t handle the issue.
C. Within District 1, if I am elected I will inherit Adobe Ridge Neighborhood Park, Arbolitos Sports Fields, with its noise and lighting issues, Arbolitos Mini Park, Starridge Neighborhood Park, and Hilleary Park. Obviously I will also have some mutual shared interest in Silverset Neighborhood Park, Aubrey Park and Old Poway Park. The latter of course are District 3, where I will work with that representative as I will work with the District 4 representative for Poway Community Park and Kumayay Ipai Interpretive Center.
Now then if you analyze that listing carefully, you will note that the areas called Poway Pomerado, Poway Estates, and Poway Portals in the App Nextdoor, they are logistically and geographically separated from easy access to the above listed parks. BUT they do have access to Meadowbrook and Pomerado Elementary. Heck even my kids played Little League at Pomerado Elementary when I lived on Hill Country Drive. So – I’m open to listening, if there is a need; I will do my best to address it. I do have some ideas – but it depends on the need.
3. Poway Road Specific Plan
The recently approved Poway Road Corridor Specific Plan allows for 1399 new residential units on Poway Road, between Oak Knoll and Garden Road.
That amounts to adding 3456 new residents and 360 new employees to the area, most densely concentrated between Community and Carriage Rd.
Which of the following statements best reflects your feelings about the new Poway Road Specific Plan (PRSP)?
a. Poway Rd looks run down and trashy. Bringing new businesses and new residential units to this area will spark a badly needed economic revival in Poway.
b. Poway Road may look funky, but I like it the way it is. I don’t want to see these familiar places torn down and replaced with upscale, chain stores. I want to see Poway’s hills, not 3 story apartment buildings.
c. I thought Poway was all built out. I resent the state making Poway build more residential units. But if we have to build them, I would rather build on Poway Rd instead of opening up east Poway for development.
d. Growth is inevitable. We should look to the future and forget about the past.
Please add anything else you would like to say about the PRSP.
Dave Grosch-declined to participate
Jon Ryan-This is one of the main issues I cover in more detail on my website https://ryan4poway.com
As someone who lives in south Poway, I understand the many issues with Poway Road. I want a revitalized Poway Road with minimal impact to traffic and design that enhances the feel of our community.
A specialized team spent over a year working on the PRCP and we thank those residents for working hard on the plan.
I know some committee members were not happy with the final product because of the increases in density and potential decreases in parking. Being in the real estate industry, I do not agree with the current council that the only way to get development done on Poway Road is to increase the density beyond our current requirements. There are developers looking for good land to develop and part of the city’s job is looking to the future to make the road maintain the character, but bring us more restaurants and facilities we can all use.
By allowing the option to reduce parking by as much as 20% over the current standard, the plan sets up a situation where the new residents do not have enough space to park, so they end up parking in the surrounding neighborhoods and causing more traffic and struggles for the homeowners that have been here for years to find places to park their cars.
You only have to drive or walk down Robison or Oak Knoll Roads to see how not having enough parking is a huge problem.
Because I live in Heritage Hills, I often drive down one and when I go to the park, I walk down the other one and see the parking problems. Carriage Street south also has major issues.
These are planning decisions made in the past that affect us today. Limiting parking for new development in the hopes that more people will take the bus or bike just does not work out in reality and we end up with lots of cars parked around several apartments or condos because we have not enough parking in those developments.
If I am elected to represent District 1, there is time to change this increased density and limited parking and I strongly feel that is what we should do.
John Carson- 2.7 miles. Roughly the distance between Oak Knoll Road and Garden Rd. I live a little over 900 feet from Poway Rd. making me the candidate closest to the development area considered in the Poway Road Corridor Specific Plan. From my house, you can hear the buzz of noises coming from Poway Road. With all of that information in mind, I have specific interests with what development the City of Poway allows on Poway Road. I really believe the PRSP is the start of a rejuvenation of Poway Road. The Poway city staff and City Council have the obligation to ensure thoughtful developments that represent Poway. (I don’t think the OutPost designs fit Poway, ie. Poway Library or new medical building. It looks much more like 4S Ranch than Poway.) As much as more density along will be an inconvenience, this same density will bring an economic revival to our beloved city. Traffic will be a tradeoff. Our city staff will need to be on top of traffic light timing and Poway Road maintenance. As tenured residents, we all know alternative routes to get to and from just about anywhere in San Diego County.
Finally, I contend that I am neither for or against making any of the above statements; a, b, c, or d. I am for listening to the people of Poway when new developments are brought before the council. I differ from our current Council in that they believe their job is to "educate" the public. When I am elected, my job will be to listen to the public.
Peter Neild-When I read question 3; my immediate thought was “welcome to the matrix”. I had a difficult time separating out the 4 parts, to reflect my feelings about the Poway Road Specific Plan. Then in my attempt to simplify them, by breaking them into their distinct parts, A=2, B=6, C=5 and D=2; I became even more confused.
Then I thought of one of my favorite T-shirts. Perhaps you have seen me in it. Across the chest it says:
1N76LL1G3NC3 15 7H3 4B1L17Y 7O 4D4P7 7O CH4NG3. By Stephan Hawking, or in this case 573PH3N H4WK1NG. Perhaps, in this case it does seem appropriate.
What these 4 parts of question 3 are really asking me, about “change” is; am I intelligent? Well in this case perhaps not.
I guess, I’m going to have to mix, match and perhaps even ignore some of the 15 different segments of the four parts (A, B, C and D) and come up with my own mix. So here goes:
I thought (and believe) that Poway is built out. I resent the state making Poway build more. I want to see Poway’s hills, instead of feeling claustrophobic driving down Poway road feeling enclosed by 3 story structures.
Yes, perhaps Poway Road does look kind of funky, even to the point of run-down and trashy, in some people’s opinions. But that represents our history; a living context of the way things used to be. And lease we forget, we did move here, we must have liked it at some point. At least I did. So the question about “change” is valid. Do we want “change”? I think so – but perhaps more slowly and carefully.
As I am traveling around District 1 and asking people their feelings, I have so far heard that while the plan was worked on by a committee (planning group) and received the approval of the existing City Council, perhaps they were a little hasty. Perhaps the plan is a little too definitive and perhaps being implemented too quickly. So perhaps we should look at (as I am) the Poway Road Corridor Specific Plan, and remove the words “Specific Plan” and insert the word “Guide”. Perhaps we should use the “Guide” as a plan, but not live up to its upper limits. And, we should proceed carefully and slowly.
Now then, to the initial premise of question 3, at the very beginning of the question, it says; “The recently approved Poway Road Corridor Specific Plan allows for 1399 new residential units on Poway Road, between Oak Knoll and Garden Road. That amounts to adding 3456 new residents and 360 new employees to the area, most densely concentrated between Community and Carriage Rd.”
So hopefully, I can regain some of what I thought was my intelligence. The premise states that our population will increase by 3456 new residents. Really!?! Do we want that? Is that the trend? I have been actively working on a “Note” for my campaign Facebook page titled “Population”. When I get it done; more of this and perhaps a glimmer of hope for my intelligence will be there. Why the delay you might ask. Well I’m still collecting information and “feelings” for the people I’m going to be representing, and that’s not just District 1 – I’m hearing this from many different sources, thank you South Poway Votes – you (collectively) are a great resource.
___________________________________________________________
4. General Fund
(short version) Do you think the city is transferring too many general fund expenses to our water, sewer, trash, LMD bills?
(long version) It seems as if the current trend is to transfer expenses that used to be paid by the general fund to residents. For example, when the City voted to extend a contract to an exclusive trash hauler, the contract included the provision that the City would get free trash service. That wiped hundreds of thousands of dollars off the general fund expenditures and added those costs to our trash bills. The City charges a “cost allocation” to our water and sewer debts, and to the landscape maintenance districts too. The cost allocation is a share of all of the costs of running various city departments. Our water and sewer bills get dinged for half the cost to run the legislative and administrative department in the City (city clerk, city manager, asst city manager, city councilmembers) as well as a portion of the costs to run the human resources department, some planning expenses and to pay the city attorney. This is in addition to paying for the city employees who work in the Public Works department. The City has also been charging the water and sewer ratepayers for all of the water that is used at city facilities including the parks and the pool. Last year, the City started paying a portion of those costs, but not the full costs. Why aren’t those costs paid by the general fund? Payments for a portion of the bonds to pay off the city hall building are charged to our water and sewer bills. But when the City sold the old water building on Poway Rd, a building paid for by water and sewer ratepayers, the proceeds of the sale were put into the general fund, not in the water and sewer fund. Revenue from using the water reservoirs as cell towers amounted to $610,194. All of it went into the general fund, none of it was used to reduce our water bills. The City took $5.2 million from the sewer fund and $2.6 million from the water fund and loaned it to the redevelopment agency. Some of those loans are over 25 years old. The City could pay it back with the proceeds from the sale of redevelopment property, but instead they are squirreling away over $9 million of that money to build a new community center. The general fund used to pay for all street landscaping. Then new developments had to form LMDs to pay for new landscaping Recently, the City tried to add more of us into the old LMDs. Now, they are talking about a city-wide LMD where they can transfer another general expense on to property owners. It seems as if assets go in the general fund, and debts are billed to us. Do you find this trend disturbing? What do you think should be done about it?
Dave Grosch-declined to participate
Jon Ryan-I discuss water billing, LMDs and several others issues on my website at https://ryan4poway.com:
Accounting shenanigans aside, generally, we should be paying less. Whichever way the city accounts for revenue or increased fees/taxes, I do not feel like the current representation are good stewards of our money. We often see them moving money around to cover shortfalls and just this year we have had millions of dollars in errors and overruns. I do not like to get bogged down in what they are doing wrong, more in the general scope that we are not getting the best value for our money. To have us overpay for water to fund other projects is wrong, just as it is to use proceeds from other projects to pay for water. The council and management do not work on being efficient and definitely do not work on preventing massive errors that cost the residents and bill payers money. In 4 or so years we have had several quite frankly ridiculous errors that never result in the city having more money, but in loss to the city. The shell game of what goes in what bucket and what comes across from another bucket needs to end and an easily understandable budget needs to be put forth. Just eliminating management errors would have saved us millions of dollars over the last few years.
LMDs should be paid for by those who benefit and going forward we should not approve these types of projects in the future because the regulations are not in favor of the city or the taxpayers. HOAs are generally used to pay for landscaping and that is a much better way to handle these types of situations going on in the future instead of LMDs that do not benefit those who are not in the impact zone of the LMDs.
We certainly already have city wide maintenance for landscaping so we do not need to allocate the cost of those who live in say Arbolitos with the taxes and fees of those who live in Garden Road who see no benefit from the Twin Peaks road increased landscape and no property value increase.
How much money have we already wasted trying to adjust LMDs this year alone? I will research it, but the costs we have done for surveys and polling and all that might well be over what additional costs the city was facing. Said another way, does it make much sense to spend $350,000 to fix a $200,000 problem? Because you have taken a 200K problem and turned it into a 550K problem. That is not sound financial management.
We need a complete rework of our accounting and to hold management responsible for losses. In private industry you almost never see a project that overruns it's initial budget by almost 100% as Espola Road has done and if you do, the person or people responsible do not get significant raises and increases to pension.
According to transparent California, our city managers total pay plus benefits in 2016 was approximately 322K and in 2017 it was 379K. Her salary and benefits this year will be even higher. We are paying significantly more for a manager who has been there and part of all of these errors, going back to the water billing errors, the contract billing errors, the pool closure and additional cost fiasco and the Espola road planning. By her pay, it seems we are rewarding screw-ups and I think that needs to change now!
John Carson-Revenues should be held in funds as directed and costs applied as needed from utilization under each fund. If we need to "borrow" or transfer fund expenses from the general fund as we do today, each case should be handled on a case by case basis.
Peter Neild-Short Answer = YES.
Long Answer (and it is brief).
I have not heard any mention about controlling expenses, other than very brief one-liners, by those controlling the organization, saying it is un-reasonable. Every organization that I have ever worked for has been confronted with times when there are more expenses than income. In this instance, the source of income is in question. The primary driving force with regards to expense control; is that the organization gets used to NOT concentrating on cost control when the income is good. When the income is not good very hard decisions get made. I have been the victim of “cost cut-backs” three times in my professional life. I also conducted two such evolutions as a manager. On either side it is not pleasant, but I have always understood the need. The second factor that comes into the delicate balance of expense and income are the un-intended consequences of both – that has to be examined as well.
If elected as the District 1 representative the first long term project upon which I will embark is the close examination of the Expenses – PERIOD. My mission, if elected, is NOT growth, it will be a period of examination and cost mitigation. My inclination will be towards not taking on new projects, but managing more closely those that are already in place, or committed to. Now then with regards to the “committed to”; those issues are the ones that are critical to the people of Poway. So again I ask, bring me up to speed with what is important to you; post if you don’t care about privacy @pete4d1poway on FB; and/or in private send me an email: pete4d1poway@gmail.com.
Wow – I can’t believe I kept this to half a page.
______________________________________________________
5. Housing
There are 2 mandates requiring Poway to plan for and/or build certain kinds of housing, one from the state and the other from the redevelopment program. The state requires every jurisdiction to plan for a “fair share” of the housing needs for the future. Sandag is the local agency where the overall number of low, very low, moderate and above moderate housing numbers are divided up for San Diego county jurisdictions for each housing cycle (a period of about 5- 10 yrs). Poway and the other cities must then zone enough land at a density high enough to meet their allocation of houses in each category. These will be market rate homes, not deed restricted “affordable” housing.
The redevelopment program required that each agency spend a certain percentage of incoming redevelopment dollars on affordable housing. Affordable housing is deed restricted housing for low and moderate income people. People have to qualify by income level for such housing. Because affordable housing brings in less rent money than market rate properties, the financing for affordable units is more complex and difficult. The redevelopment agencies have been disbanded, but some existing affordable housing projects and programs still exist in Poway and are administered by the Poway Housing Authority.
A. If it were up to you, where would you rezone land in Poway to accommodate Poway’s “fair share” allotment from the next housing cycle?
B. Do you think Poway needs more affordable (deed restricted for low and moderate income) housing? Why or why not.
Dave Grosch-declined to participate
Jon Ryan-This and other issues are discussed in more detail under the issues tab on my website at https://ryan4poway.com
The description of the question is mixing multiple types of housing units and ownership vs. rental properties when there are options for low income ownership available too. I am a real estate broker handling both commercial, residential and income producing properties, so naturally, this is a very complex issue as the politics could be changing dramatically due to the ballot measure on the November Ballot.
The ballot measure is a possible repeal of the Costa Hawkings Rental act and if passed, the measure would give city leaders new options when establishing or updating rent control policies. Longstanding rules limiting rent control to properties built before February 1995—or earlier, in many cases—would be struck from the books, giving local governments the power to place newer buildings under rent control regulations. They would also be able to add additional rent control measures to single family homes and condos and current homes that are under rent control would be subject to these controls even after current tenants move out (I do not think we have any of these units in Poway currently).
As you can imagine, there are positive and negative effects to this ballot measure, which may drive development away and could significantly affect current plans for deed restricted affordable housing, rental housing and future building.
For example, if I am a developer that is going to build deed restricted units or rent controlled apartments in Poway, but I can develop and build and rent similar homes in say Mesa, Arizona, without the deed restrictions and rent control, which will limit my profit on both the building, sale and future rents on the homes, where should I chose to develop?
Assuming building and regulatory costs are similar other than the rent controls or deed restrictions, I can make significantly more money building in Mesa Arizona because I could charge market rents if I build and own the homes, or full market price if I build the homes and sell them, while in Poway, I might have to set aside a certain number of homes of my lot development to be deed restricted moderate income homes (say 1 out of 8 to 1 out of 12 homes) so when I build my subdivision of say 10 homes that all would be market value of 1 million dollars, I have to have one home that would be a low or mid level affordable home with deed restrictions that might only be able to be sold for $500K.
Same thing might happen with rent controlled apartments, I can charge market rents for my homes built in Mesa of $2000/month but the exact same homes in Poway might have a future rent control measure that might only let me charge $1000/month for the rent. These effects can be very dynamic and because of that, it is hard to say where or how future development might occur.
We currently have overlays that are already designated for the different housing types but in reality, if that bill passes most cities in the state and possibly our state congress will likely have to change laws to deal with the problems that it will create from a building standpoint. Rent control can result in even less housing availability as you can see from my case above, and it also can cause higher home prices due to inventory.
It is quite obvious that most of Coastal California needs more homes and are prices are currently into the stratosphere for too many reasons to list, but the economy and politics can change that all. I would say that a significant part of our homeowners in Poway could not buy the homes they live in at today's prices without their accrued equity, so it is not just low or moderate income that has a problem with housing pricing, it's most of the state. We need more homes of every type but we need to manage the development with care to keep our City in the Country feel and not increase the density of Poway as with what the current council members are doing which will turn it into San Diego or Carmel Mountain, where they have chosen to build even more dense housing than we are doing.
John Carson-
Peter Neild- Part 1 = “If it were up to you” (me). OK if it were up to me the answer is, not in the way that it is currently required. The County and State of California require specific action with regards to low income housing. This is something that I don’t like, so if it were up to me – with no county or state mandates, NO I would not “rezone”, the way it is now. But that, doesn’t allow for what I would do, and I will try to do if I am elected. I have an idea, that will need to go through the legal gauntlet, and unfortunately that is a path that has to be done by the City of Poway, not by an individual. Yes, I know that doesn’t directly answer part 1. My answer to part 1 is my idea, which I will get to after Part 2.
Part 2 = And, yes I have to dissect this one as well. Let me pull out the part in parens, for a moment. “Do you think Poway needs more affordable housing.” YES, I do feel that Poway needs more affordable housing.
BUT – this is where the stuff inside the parens comes into play. I feel that deed restrictions, in their current form create issues. Entire developments have long lasting repercussions, when you have to wrestle with “deed restrictions”. Over the long term they form a trap to individual progress.
Now this is where my idea comes into play, and mind you it may not pass the legal gauntlet that it will have to go through. It’s just wild speculation on my part at the moment, I’m not a real-estate guy, or a developer and I’m not beholding to any. However, I am hopeful that the people of Poway will want to be on the cutting edge of this.
Our country has some great and creative people in it. They are generally hard working and working towards a successful life. Most generally do not want to live on hand-outs or be classified as those who need hand-outs. They want to work hard on what-ever they invest in and want a good return on their investment. They want to climb the ladder of success. But they have a real tough time if the first rung on that ladder is out of their reach. And with regards to housing in Poway, that first step is out-of-reach for a goodly number of people that would LOVE to live here, but can’t because that first rung is beyond their current means.
So this is where my idea comes in. It starts with the concept of “sweat equity”. Those people that are trying to work to be successful are the same people that generally are willing to invest in “sweat equity” with their own free time labor. They have the time, but even the property that they could invest in with their labor is out of their reach because homes are priced on the basis of “comps”. If there is one house in a neighborhood that for what-ever reason has not been maintained on a par with those around it, and it comes up for sale; its price is of course only slightly lower, based on the average of the “comps”. That property displeases the neighbors no end because it lowers statistically the possible value of their house. They want every house in the neighborhood to be a “nice house” so their neighborhood will be a “nice neighborhood”. In the current way of doing things, that house will most likely be bought by a “flipper”. “Flipper “ to me are people or companies with investment money and the resources to go in and rapidly fix up a house – getting it back up to the surrounding “comps” and sell it for a profit. They are delighted and so are the neighbors. But the “flippers” come and go; and the family that wants to live there and are willing to work for it, are still left out.
So here is my idea. What if the City of Poway was to look more closely at the zoning rules and the “redevelopment” actions to give those people who want to live in Poway, want to invest their sweat equity to improve the value of the home they buy, and live in, raise a family in – a break.
What if we could set up a system within the City of Poway that would put property that would qualify as a candidate property; a piece of property that could NOT be considered in the “comps” calculations? It would have to be sold at a price NOT boosted by the values of the surrounding property. It would have to be priced on its own. Finally it would have to be a system that would require occupancy. Would that put it within the reach for that first step on the ladder? What I do know is that an entire area of the city would not have to be rezoned. We could have those willing to put sweat equity into accommodating properties all over the city, for a net improvement by property owners who live there. So I have now come around and answered Part 1 – This is what I will try to do, if given the chance; and allowed to “do it my way”.
Would that meet the requirements of the county and the state? – Well, that needs investigating!
Would the neighbors of such a piece of property – be OK with a neighbor that wants to make it “nice”?
Would neighborhoods be more neighborly with people living there who want to be there?
Would that put some pressure on Land-Lords to keep their rental property “nice”?
Note that this is just an “idea”. I don’t know if it will work. I don’t know if it’s legal. But what I do know that for the most part, “sweat equity” is what I invested in when that first rung (mine was the house on Golden Way) was just within my reach, before property appreciation in Poway turned into a sky-rocket.
6. Staff Residency
The city council members must live in Poway since their decisions affect the quality of life in the city in which they live. Senior management on the city staff make some administrative decisions concerning land use, zoning, and developments without taking them to the city council for approval. Should senior city staff management be required to live in Poway since their decisions affect the residents of Poway?
Dave Grosch-declined to participate
Jon Ryan-Sorry answered the first one in the open because it is confusing, but I believe it's illegal to require someone to love anywhere as a condition of their job except military so while the goal might be too have them live here, it's not a real enforcable goal. What do you think?
John Carson-
Peter Neild-Since the City Staff works at the direction of the Mayor with input from the City Council and therefore not under the influence of direct input from the citizens of Poway (other than responding to the action or inaction of their or their subordinates assigned duties and work product).
Their residence does not NEED to be within Poway City limits.
However, "skin in the game" does help.
7. Water & Sewer Rates
Which of these would you support?
A. Cost allocations- only allow the city to charge for costs that are directly related to water and sewer. For example, currently half of all of the costs for the legislative and administrative department (city council, city manager, assistant city manager, city clerk, etc) are charged to the water and sewer bills. A change in cost allocations would require that employees keep a record and only charge for the time spent directly on water and sewer issues.
- Change to a uniform sewer rate. Currently, the lowest water users pay the highest sewer rates. Converting to a uniform rate would relieve an unfair burden on smaller volume users.
- Disallow legal fees and cost of judgments to be billed to the water and sewer fund. Bill them to the general fund.
- When assets paid for by water and sewer ratepayers are sold, put the money into the water and sewer fund instead of the general fund.
- Insist that any rents or leases collected on water and sewer property or infrastructure be put into the water and sewer fund.
- Pay back the $8 million borrowed from the water and sewer funds at an interest rate equal to the amount that Poway”s investment fund earned each year since the money was borrowed. Accelerate the repayments so that they money will be paid back within the next 4 years.
Please share any other ideas you have to reduce water and sewer rates.
Dave Grosch-declined to participate
Jon Ryan-Several of these hit on the same theme which is accounting for the costs and income of our water accurately. Revenues from the water department should remain in the water department and paying staff from different buckets to spread the costs around does not make much sense either. I am sure we do have personnel that fulfill different roles and need to be applied to different cost centers but costs and income for water needs to remain with water so we can understand the issues better than they are currently accounted for. Based on the projected and Fiscal Year budgets and income for investments, it does not make a whole lot of sense to maintain a loan for a higher rate than what we are earning on our investment accounts. If we are earning under 1% on our general investment portfolio and we are paying more than that in loan obligations for water, then it makes no sense to continue with the loan. This leads to a broader issue in the budget where in several cases we are paying out more interest than we are taking in for our cash reserves. It also makes sense to comb thru the budget with an extremely sharp eye on cost reductions and being that staff is our highest cost, we need to make sure several very highly paid managers are providing at least their value in output that they are costing us. In private industry, whether it be a small business or a Top Ten corporation, the value of the employee to the firm should be in excess of their salary. The city does not exist to employ and pay retirement benefits for the employees, the employees are hired to manage and run the city and based on recent events and my own observations, we are not getting the value back for the staff we have. 1 million saved is just as good as 1 million earned.
Other suggestions to reduce water and sewer may include technological research to increase efficiency or reduce cost. If we can manage our water system for lower cost and evaluate how we possibly reclaim water that is currently wasted, we can cut our costs and thus drive lower water and sewer rates. I do not feel we are paying enough attention to the biggest item people pay the city for other than property tax. Every employee at city hall should be looking at how we can do a better job and reduce costs.
In depth answers to this and many others issues can be found on my website at https://ryan4poway.com under the issues tab.
John Carson-A. I would fully support any cost allocation initiatives. Only direct costs of the water and sewer district should be applied to that budget. If council or other non-water and sewer district employees spend time working on matters of the water and sewer district, they SHOULD KEEP a record of time spent for those matters. This is a fair and transparent way of doing business so that the citizens of Poway can easily find information.
B. Again, I would fully support some type of water and sewer rate change (subject to input). I do not believe what we have today is in the best interest of all the citizens of Poway.
C. Costs for the entire city budget should be allocated to where the cost was incurred. If a computer in City Hall breaks, that cost should be allocated to whichever department that computer was serving. If the city Manager is spending time on the water and sewer district, that time should be costed and accounted for by the water and sewer disctrict. That time needs to be quantified so that direct cost is easily identified.
D. Again, and I am starting to sound like a broken record... Costs and revenues should be allocated to the departments that incurr the cost or revenues.
E. I think that rents or leases should be separatley accounted for in their own area of the budget. Easily identifiable and described so that the people of Poway can easily understand where the money is going and coming from. I.E. If a water tower is getting cell phone tower lease revenue, that should be listed in the RENTS AND LEASES section of the budget and the Water and Sewer District and Tower name should be listed.
F. Poway's investments earned a 1.8 to 2.2 percent return on the most recent version of the investment report that I read. I know for a fact that market rate loans earned a significantly great percent return during the same period.
The water and sewer district should not be a profit center for no more than upgrades and future planning. My understanding of the situation being eluded to is not clear, however costs and revenues in the city budget should be allocated to the areas in which the costs and revenues were incurred. SO, if the city didn't have enough money in a certain dept. to fund something.... Then the city should not have funded that specific something.
It is very shortsighted to borrow from one pocket to pay the other. Eventually when you really need that money, you will have forgotten to pay yourself back.
Peter Neild-Generally, based upon the responses I get when water and sewer is discussed, the 6 steps are in compliance and therefore would get my support. However, with regards to #’s A, B, and F there are some deviations. Those deviations, if I am elected would fit into my suggestions to the Mayor and therefore eventually the staff.
A. All city employees would be trained on “Job Code” usage. All the individual tasks performed by city staff at all levels salaried and hourly would be assigned a weighted job code. The primary function of the Job Code would be to properly identify the cost of Poway City Government, where salaried would be on a percentage of time basis, and hourly would be direct weighted cost to the cost center. The “Weighted” Job Code usage would also invoke information for performance review. Supervisors would grade the job code with efficiency and benefit achievements. In the context of Question 7.A; the weighted job code would provide the information to address the suggestion (#A) with the information, for addressing the “Water and Sewer” cost code structure.
B. In the context of Question 7.B, some additional burden would be placed upon the water and sewer user. But first, the Water District would have to replace the current analog meters with newer digital meters such as those being installed in the Otay Water District. This would be to facilitate not only the progress of digital metering over analog but also provide the training water users would require as described below. Please see the Otay Water District Training Video - https://youtu.be/Fm6_3pFohoo
Water users would have to provide information for water usage in three categories on a quarterly basis; A) general usage (which implies equal sewer usage), B) Pool maintenance (no sewer usage), and C) Irrigation usage (no sewer usage). The type C usage (irrigation) would be factored with lot size and time of day, such that water table contribution could be computed.
Also, note that Pool Service and Yard Maintenance contractors would be trained to provide the recording of B and C measurements, in addition to other professional people such as plumbers. Water and Sewer customers who do not provide quarterly usage information will be based on comparable properties plus 10%.
Finally with regards to Question 7 the water and sewer bills would be determined by the information provided in parts A, B and C above. This actual water and sewer usage on an estimated quarterly basis, would allow for seasonal and building occupation deviations. Obviously more frequent certified readings would be accepted, which would allow for time periods when the building (residences) were not actually occupied, such as vacations.
F. The only deviation with regards to Question 7 for this item would be the repayment timing. The four year repayment plan should be spread out to 10 years. In my opinion the loan from Water and Sewer to the City was a method of addressing financial crisis of the downturn of the economy in 2008. Since the “recovery” has been slow, the repayment should be over an equal time frame to that of the recovery.
No comments:
Post a Comment