Laserfiche WebLink
File Number: 18-209 <br />In addition, similar to the procedures implemented for Measures HH, OO, PP, and NN over the <br />last two election cycles, staff would also recommend the retention of a public affairs consultant to <br />assist in coordinating all of these efforts, as well as developing factual public outreach materials <br />and other associated work in advance of ballot placement. Such assistance typically costs in the <br />order of up to $7,000 per month. <br />Lastly, based on prior elections, it is anticipated that the election costs associated with adding a <br />parcel tax to the ballot could result in at least an additional $50,000 in charges from the Registrar <br />of Voters. The majority of these charges are associated with printing and translation costs for the <br />various components of the measure, including the measure text, arguments for and against, and <br />rebuttals to the arguments for and against. <br /> <br />Summary of Potential One-Time Budget Impacts Associated with Ballot Placement: <br />Public Affairs Consultant (based on 7,000/month):$28,000 <br />Financial Consulting Assistance ($300/hour):$10,000 <br />Public Opinion Survey:$45,000 <br />Election Costs:$50,000 <br />Estimated Total:$133,000 <br />SUMMARY AND RECOMMENDATIONS <br />Although it may be technically feasible to complete all of the procedural steps necessary to bring <br />forward a parcel tax measure for consideration by the voters as part of the November 2018 ballot, <br />staff has serious concerns regarding the amount of time that remains available to conduct a <br />sufficient and credible level of analysis and public outreach that would be necessary in advance of <br />ballot placement. <br />Furthermore, it remains unknown what other competing measures may appear on the same <br />ballot, and it is unclear whether an unsuccessful attempt at the ballot could negatively impact the <br />prospects for future funding requests from the electorate. Nevertheless, staff is prepared to <br />prioritize moving forward with such an endeavor if so directed by the City Council. <br />Finally, the City Council and the community have not yet had an opportunity to engage in the <br />discussions required to assess needed and desired staffing levels for public safety services <br />relative to available funding. For example, a recent Standards of Coverage Review conducted by <br />Citygate Associates found that current staffing is generally sufficient to meet response time <br />standards. The Council will need to consider the propriety of adding safety staffing given the <br />significant increases in salary and benefit costs anticipated in the near future. It may also wish to <br />consider technology and potential “force multipliers” that may be available to address safety <br />needs at lower costs. Once desired staffing levels were determined, it would be prudent to <br />establish priorities for expenditure of potential revenues between police and fire, staffing and <br />capital, and future service expansion vs. unfunded legacy obligations. Should the Council <br />ultimately move forward with a public safety parcel tax - either now or in the future - all of these <br />factors should be considered in a plan for expenditure of the new revenues. <br />Page 6 City of San Leandro Printed on 5/1/2018 <br />1573