October 18, 2018

What's Not to be Happy About Poway's Budget Surplus

At last night's city council meeting, the staff presented a report on the closing of the fiscal year, and lo and behold, they have an almost $5 million surplus.  Normally, that would be an occasion for giving a lot of high fives and chest thumping, but I want to take a closer look at a few items before going into celebratory mode.

1.  The City got about $1.5 million more from the RPTTF fund than they had expected. The RPTTF fund is the Redevelopment Property Tax Trust Fund.  When the redevelopment program ended, the property taxes from parcels in the redevelopment area didn't immediately revert back to the normal distribution pattern. The County still collects those property taxes, but they are put into a special pot called the RPTTF fund.  The county assessor first has to pay out a certain amount of money to pay off old redevelopment bonds and other contractual obligations of the old redevelopment agencies, and then, after those are paid, the property taxes are distributed in the same proportion and to the same entities as regular property taxes. 

The proceeds from the sale of redevelopment properties goes into the RPTTF, but mostly it is property taxes. And property taxes are for keeping the City running, for paying for safety services, and salaries of the administrative and legislative department and the city employees who maintain our streets and parks, etc.  Almost all  of the money that the City has "set aside" for the Cafagna center has come from RPTTF funds. In other words, the city is setting property taxes that normal go to fund the general operation of the city and using it for a major building fund. Remember, the city is  charging a big chunk of the departmental operating expenses on to our water and sewer bills as cost allocations. See what is happening? Our water and sewer bills are taxed to pay for the running of the city, which frees up some of our property taxes to be "set aside" to pay to build the Cafagna Center.

2. Because the swimming pool was closed, the City had lower operating costs. I'm sure the City saved on their water bill too. Oh, I forgot, we are paying a part of that bill too. The city has (as of one year ago) begun to pay the raw water costs of water used at city facilities, but water rate payers pay the costs of treating and delivering that water to city facilities. Do we get a bit of that surplus for our share of already paying for treating the water that didn't go into the pool this year?

3. About $820,000 of the surplus was for selling the Big Stone Lodge property to the Poway Housing Authority.  There are several things wrong with this transaction. One, the City bought the Big Stone Lodge property for a park. They told the state they bought it for a park when they submitted their Long-range Property Management Plan. And the State let the City keep the property when redevelopment was dissolved because they bought it for a park. The City could have also kept the property as a site for affordable housing if they had wanted. If they had done that, the City wouldn't have been able to take $820,000 from the housing fund and transfer it to their general fund and use it for the Cafagna Center or to buy down their unfunded pension obligation. Their are three losers on this- south Poway loses a great location for a much needed passive park, the housing fund lost almost a million dollars, and south Poway our riparian corridors are endangered by development. 

I suspect the City wants to find a place for veterans housing, after they bungled the proposal on Twin Peaks. So, now they plan to take a much needed park site from south Poway to compensate. Of course, we will have the opportunity to have some say about this, but really, we don't.  The decisions are made without our input. 

From Poway's Long-range Property Management Plan that was submitted to and approved by the state:


It is going to be difficult to find spots for parks in the future. And there will never be another opportunity to preserve this part of our heritage if the parcel is used for housing.  So, I am not celebrating the almost $5 million surplus. I'm mourning the loss of a great location to build a park and preserve part of our heritage.



No comments: