City of Goleta Operating Budget and Capital Improvement Program Budget for FY 2022-23 — Goleta City Council, June 21, 2022 (part 3 of 3)

homelessness; assists in the coordination of encampment cleanups with Public Works, the Sheriff’s Office, Caltrans, Union Pacific Railroad, and local outreach organizations.

5. Represents the City and the Department as a subject matter expert on homelessness and related social and behavioral health issues, answering questions, making presentations, and conducting training both internally to the City and externally to community groups and at meetings and conferences.

6. Serves as the staff liaison to the City Council’s Homelessness Issues Standing Committee, scheduling meetings, drafting staff reports and recommendations, preparing agendas and minutes, etc.

7. Assists in the administration of the City’s grantmaking programs to non-profits including the establishment of funding priorities and recommendations, program design and implementation, application and grant award, and performance evaluation, reviews requests for funding under Homelessness Support to Other Agencies.

8. Conducts surveys and performs research and statistical analysis on various problems and/or issues; collects and compiles data in office and field; analyzes data and makes recommendations on the formulation of departmental and/or City policies and procedures.

9. Compiles information and prepares reports, manuals, documents, or publications relating to administrative, fiscal, or operational issues.

10. Prepares and presents reports to City Council, commissions and/or committees; prepares ordinances and resolutions for City Council consideration and adoption.

11. Administers projects, negotiates contracts, and monitors work performed by consultants, service providers, and other outside agencies; prepares related reports, and monitors budget expenditures.

12. Leads or participates in committee activity; conducts activities with other City departments, agencies, organizations, and the community, contributing views and interests of the City and/or department in the execution of assigned duties.

13. Formulates recommendations and writes grant applications; prepares and monitors program grants and related proposals; writes and edits articles for City publications, City website, correspondence, and press releases.

14. Participates in special projects including research of new programs and services.

15. Provides assistance to department management, other City personnel, and the public regarding administrative, fiscal, or operational issues, policies, or procedures.

16. Assists the Neighborhood Services Director with department administration, including the development and oversight of the department’s strategic goals, budget, and work program.

17. May directly supervise staff and/or provide technical guidance and functional supervision to staff in the course of performing responsibilities.

QUALIFICATIONS GUIDELINES

Education, Experience and Training

Any combination of experience and training that would likely provide the required knowledge and abilities is qualifying. A typical way to obtain the knowledge and abilities would be:

Education:

 Equivalent to a bachelor’s degree from an accredited college or university with major course work in sociology, social work, urban planning, public administration, or a related field.

Exhibit A
344

HOMELESSNESS SERVICES COORDINATOR

Page 3 ends

Experience:

 Four years of increasingly responsible admin istrative and analytical experience developing, organizing, evaluating, and managing programs directed at serving people experiencing homelessness, preventing homelessness, and addressing the impacts of homelessness on the community, preferably within a local government environment, including policy development, preparing complex written reports, and the collection, compilation, and analysis of data.

Knowledge and Abilities

Knowledge of:

 Principles and practices public administration and municipal government management.  Pertinent Federal, State, and local laws, codes and regulations related to homelessness.  Principles and practices of the administration of homelessness programs.  Community social service agencies and organizations serving people experiencing homeless.
 State and Federal grant program regulations and requirements and other sources of funding for programs directed at homelessness.
 Organization and management practices as applied to the analysis, evaluation, development and implementation of programs, policies and procedures.  Principles and practices of municipal government finances.  Research and reporting methods, techniques and procedures.  Modern office practices, methods, computers and computer software including Microsoft Word and Excel.
 Safe driving principles and practices.

Ability to:

 Perform responsible and difficult administrative work involving the use of sound judgment and personal initiative.
 Perform organizational and budget analysis and present recommendations in a clear and concise manner.
 Analyze, interpret, summarize, and present administrative and technical information and data in an effective manner.
 Effectively administer a variety of depar tmental programs and administrative duties.  Evaluate and recommend improvements in operations, procedures, policies, or methods.  Interpret and apply the policies, procedures, laws, codes, and regulations pertaining to assigned programs and functions.
 Plan, organize, and execute assignments with minimal supervision and direction.  Understand and carry out verbal and written instructions; express ideas clearly and concisely verbally and in writing; read, understand, and utilize data.  Establish and maintain professional and cooperative working relationships with those contacted in the course of work.
 Use a computer and utilize software applications such as word processing, spreadsheets, database management, and graphics presentations as required by the duties of the assignment.

Special Requirements

 Possession of a valid Class “C” California driver’s license with a satisfactory driving record.

Exhibit A
345

HOMELESSNESS SERVICES COORDINATOR

Page 4 ends

PHYSICAL AND MENTAL DEMANDS/WORKING CONDITIONS

The physical and mental demands herein are representative of those that must be met by an employee to successfully perform the essential f unctions of this job. Reasonable accommodations may be made to enable individuals with disabilities to perform these essential job functions.  Mental function: Includes reading, writing, mathematical computations, operating a computer, problem solving, managing multiple projects, calmly handling complaints and problems from irate citizens or contractors, and decision making under stressful conditions.  Productivity: Incumbents must perform work in an efficient, effective and timely manner with minimal direction.
 Mobility: Incumbents require sufficient mobility to work in an office setting and operate office equipment. Incumbents may be required to perform light lifting and carrying, file documents in various locations and heights, and sit, stand, walk, remain seated, and work at a video display terminal for prolonged periods of time.
 Vision: Vision sufficient to read small prin t, computer screens, and printed documents, and to operate assigned equipment.
 Hearing: Incumbents are required to hear in the normal audio range with or without correction.
 Environment: Normal office setting with some travel to attend meetings. Must occasionally travel into the field observe homelessness and the performance of program-related field work.

Incumbents may be exposed to noise and/or dust.
 Other factors: Incumbents will be required to work extended hours including evenings and weekends. Incumbents may be required to travel outside City boundaries to attend meetings and to use a personal vehicle in the course of employment.

Date Adopted: Date Revised:

Exhibit A
346

CITY OF GOLETA, CALIFORNIA
SALARY SCHEDULE FY 2022-23

CLASSIFICATION GRADE CATEGORY
TITLE NO. B.U. / FLS A STEP 1 STEP 2 ST EP 3 STEP 4 STEP 5 STEP 6 City Hall Receptionist 100 G / NE HOURLY 20.53 21.55 22.63 23.76 24.95 26.20 BI-WEEKLY 1,642 1,724 1,810 1,901 1,996 2,096 MONTHLY 3,558 3,736 3,923 4,119 4,325 4,541 ANNUAL 42,696 44,831 47,073 49,426 51,898 54,492 Maintenance Worker I 101 G / NE HOURLY 21.76 22.85 23.99 25.19 26.45 27.77 Records Technician/Recording Clerk G / NE BI-WEEKLY 1,741 1,828 1,919 2,015 2,116 2,222 Library Assistant I G / NE MONTHLY 3,772 3,960 4,158 4,366 4,584 4,813 ANNUAL 45,258 47,521 49,897 52,392 55,011 57,762 Maintenance Worker II 102 G / NE HOURLY 23.28 24.45 25.67 26.95 28.30 29.71 Office Specialist G / NE BI-WEEKLY 1,863 1,956 2,053 2,156 2,264 2,377 Library Assistant II G / NE MONTHLY 4,036 4,237 4,449 4,672 4,905 5,150 ANNUAL 48,426 50,847 53,390 56,059 58,862 61,805 Senior Office Specialist 103 G / NE HOURLY 24.91 26.16 27.46 28.84 30.28 31.79 Library Technician G / NE BI-WEEKLY 1,993 2,093 2,197 2,307 2,422 2,544 MONTHLY 4,318 4,534 4,761 4,999 5,249 5,511 ANNUAL 51,816 54,407 57,127 59,983 62,983 66,132 Accounting Specialist 104 G / NE HOURLY 26.90 28.25 29.66 31.15 32.70 34.34 Permit Technician G / NE BI-WEEKLY 2,152 2,260 2,373 2,492 2,616 2,747 Senior Library Technician G / E MONTHLY 4,663 4,897 5,141 5,399 5,668 5,952 Facilities Maintenance Technician G / NE ANNUAL 55,961 58,759 61,697 64,782 68,021 71,422 Administrative Assistant 105 G(*) / NE HOURLY 29.06 30.51 32.04 33.64 35.32 37.08 Lead Maintenance Worker G / NE BI-WEEKLY 2,325 2,441 2,563 2,691 2,825 2,967 Public Affairs Assistant G / NE MONTHLY 5,037 5,288 5,553 5,830 6,122 6,428 Librarian I M / NE ANNUAL 60,438 63,460 66,633 69,965 73,463 77,136 Assistant Engineering Technician G / NE
Public Works Supervisor 106 M / NE HOURLY 31.38 32.95 34.60 36.33 38.14 40.05 Librarian II M / NE BI-WEEKLY 2,511 2,636 2,768 2,906 3,052 3,204 Associate Engineering Technician G / NE MONTHLY 5,439 5,711 5,997 6,297 6,612 6,942 ANNUAL 65,273 68,537 71,964 75,562 79,340 83,307 Assistant Planner 107 G / NE HOURLY 33.89 35.59 37.37 39.23 41.20 43.26 Legal Office Assistant C / NE BI-WEEKLY 2,711 2,847 2,989 3,139 3,296 3,460 Management Assistant G(*) / NE MONTHLY 5,875 6,168 6,477 6,801 7,141 7,498 Senior Engineering Technician G / NE ANNUAL 70,495 74,020 77,721 81,607 85,687 89,971 Public Records Specialist G(*) / NE
Accountant 108 G(*) / NE HOURLY 36.60 38.43 40.35 42.37 44.49 46.72 Budget Analyst C / NE BI-WEEKLY 2,928 3,075 3,228 3,390 3,559 3,737 Code Compliance Officer G / NE MONTHLY 6,345 6,662 6,995 7,345 7,712 8,097 Deputy City Clerk M / E ANNUAL 76,135 79,941 83,938 88,135 92,542 97,169 Executive Assistant C / E
Public Works Inspector G / NE
Assistant Engineer* 109 G / NE HOURLY 39.53 41.51 43.58 45.76 48.05 50.45 Emergency Services Coordinator G / E BI-WEEKLY 3,163 3,321 3,487 3,661 3,844 4,036 Human Resources Analyst C / E MONTHLY 6,852 7,195 7,554 7,932 8,329 8,745 Human Resources Analyst/DEI Officer C / E ANNUAL 82,225 86,337 90,653 95,186 99,945 104,943 Management Analyst M(*) / E
Environmental Services Specialist M / NE
Recreation Supervisor M / NE
Associate Planner 110 G / NE HOURLY 42.69 44.83 47.07 49.42 51.89 54.49 Senior Legal Analyst C / E BI-WEEKLY 3,416 3,586 3,766 3,954 4,152 4,359 MONTHLY 7,400 7,770 8,159 8,567 8,995 9,445 ANNUAL 88,803 93,244 97,906 102,801 107,941 113,338 Associate Engineer** 111 G / NE HOURLY 46.11 48.41 50.84 53.38 56.05 58.85 Supervising Librarian M / E BI-WEEKLY 3,689 3,873 4,067 4,270 4,484 4,708 Accounting Supervisor C / E MONTHLY 7,992 8,392 8,812 9,252 9,715 10,200 ANNUAL 95,908 100,703 105,738 111,025 116,576 122,405 Environmental Services Coordinator 112 M / E HOURLY 49.80 52.29 54.90 57.65 60.53 63.56 Senior Management Analyst C / E BI-WEEKLY 3,984 4,183 4,392 4,612 4,842 5,085 Project Manager M / E MONTHLY 8,632 9,063 9,516 9,992 10,492 11,016 Homelessness Outreach Coordinator M / E ANNUAL 103,580 108,759 114,197 119,907 125,902 132,198 Senior Planner M / E
Sustainability Coordinator M / E
Senior Housing Analyst M / E
Category or Bargaining Unit Fair Labor Standards Act Classification C = Confidential NE = Non Exempt from overtime
G = General Unit E = Exempt from overtime
M = Miscellaneous Unit
M/M = Mid-Management
M/C = Conf. Management
E = Executive Management
* May be confidential, depening on assignment
Salary Schedule - Page 1
Effective: July 1, 2022
Exhibit A
347

CITY OF GOLETA, CALIFORNIA
SALARY SCHEDULE FY 2022-23

CLASSIFICATION GRADE CATEGORY
TITLE NO. B.U./FLS A STEP 1 STEP 2 STEP 3 STEP 4 STEP 5 STEP 6 Accounting Manager 113 M/C / E HOURLY 54.28 56.99 59.84 62.84 65.98 69.28 Community Relations Manager M/C / E BI-WEEKLY 4,342 4,560 4,787 5,027 5,278 5,542 Economic Development Coord. M / E MONTHLY 9,409 9,879 10,373 10,892 11,436 12,008 HR / Risk Manager M/C / E ANNUAL 112,902 118,548 124,475 130,699 137,234 144,095 Library Services Manager M/M / E
Assistant to the City Manager M/C / E
Senior Engineer M / E
Sustainability Manager M/M / E
Deputy City Attorney 114 C / E HOURLY 59.17 62.12 65.23 68.49 71.92 75.51 Supervising Senior Planner M / E BI-WEEKLY 4,733 4,970 5,218 5,479 5,753 6,041 Parks and Recreation Manager M/M / E MONTHLY 10,255 10,768 11,306 11,872 12,465 13,089 ANNUAL 123,064 129,217 135,678 142,462 149,585 157,064 City Clerk 115 E - E HOURLY 64.49 67.71 71.10 74.66 78.39 82.31 Planning Manager M/M / E BI-WEEKLY 5,159 5,417 5,688 5,972 6,271 6,585 Principal Civil Engineer M/M / E MONTHLY 11,178 11,737 12,324 12,940 13,587 14,267 Public Works Manager M/M / E ANNUAL 134,139 140,846 147,889 155,283 163,047 171,200 M - E
Principal Project Manager M/M / E
Parks and Open Space Manager M/M / E
CIP Manager M/M / E
Assistant Public Works Director 116 M/M / E HOURLY 70.29 73.81 77.50 81.37 85.44 89.72 Library Director (Asst. Neighborhood Services Director) M/M / E BI-WEEKLY 5,624 5,905 6,200 6,510 6,835 7,177 MONTHLY 12,184 12,794 13,433 14,105 14,810 15,551 ANNUAL 146,212 153,523 161,199 169,259 177,722 186,608 Assistant City Attorney 117 E / E HOURLY 76.62 80.45 84.47 88.70 93.13 97.79 Finance Director E / E BI-WEEKLY 6,130 6,436 6,758 7,096 7,451 7,823 Neighborhood Services Director E / E MONTHLY 13,281 13,945 14,642 15,374 16,143 16,950 General Services Director E / E ANNUAL 159,371 167,340 175,707 184,492 193,716 203,402 Public Works Director*** 118 E / E HOURLY 83.52 87.69 92.08 96.68 101.51 106.59 Planning & Environmental Review Director1
E / E BI-WEEKLY 6,681 7,015 7,366 7,734 8,121 8,527 MONTHLY 14,476 15,200 15,960 16,758 17,596 18,476 ANNUAL 173,714 182,400 191,520 201,096 211,151 221,709 Assistant City Manager 119 E / E HOURLY 87.69 92.08 96.68 101.51 106.59 111.92 BI-WEEKLY 7,015 7,366 7,734 8,121 8,527 8,954 MONTHLY 15,200 15,960 16,758 17,596 18,476 19,399 ANNUAL 182,400 191,520 201,096 211,151 221,709 232,794 City Manager ANNUAL 267,883 (eff. 10/23/21)
1Title Under Review
*If certified as an Engineer-in-Training (EIT) in the State of California, this position will receive a 5% pay differential at each step. **If registered as Civil Engineer in the State of California, this position will receive a 5% pay differential at each step. ***If also serving as City Engineer, this position will receive a 5% pay differential at each step.

Category
C = Confidential NE = Non Exempt from overtime
G = General Unit E = Exempt from overtime
M = Miscellaneous Unit
M/M = Mid-Management
M/C = Conf. Management
E = Executive Management
* May be confidential, depending on assignment
Document History: Revised April 9, 2022, March 5, 2022, January 1, 2022, November 16, 2021, July 20, 2021, January 1, 2022, July 1, 2021, February 18, 2020, January 4, 2020, December 3, 2019, July 6, 2019, January 5, 2019 Fair Labor Standards Act Classification
Senior Project Engineer - grandfathered class
Salary Schedule - Page 2
Effective: July 1, 2022
Exhibit A
348

City Manager
City Manager 1.00 1.00
Assistant City Manager 1.00 1.00
Deputy City Manager - -
Assistant to the City Manager 1.00 1.00
Human Resources Risk Manager 1.00 (1.00) -
Management Analyst 1.00 1.00
Human Resources Analyst 1.00 (1.00) -
Human Resources Analyst/DEI Officer 1.00 (1.00) -
Executive Assistant 1.00 1.00
Management Assistant 1.00 (1.00) -
Office Specialist 0.90 0.90
City Hall Receptionist - -
Total City Manager 9.90 (4.00) - - 5.90 City Clerk
City Clerk 1.00 1.00
Deputy City Clerk 2.00 2.00
Public Records Specialist - 1.00 1.00
Records Technician/Recording Clerk - -
Total City Clerk 3.00 - - 1.00 4.00
City Attorney
City Attorney - -
Assistant City Attorney 1.00 1.00
Deputy City Attorney - -
Sr. Legal Analyst - -
Management Assistant 1.00 1.00
Total City Attorney 2.00 - - - 2.00 Community Relations
Community Relations Manager 1.00 1.00
Management Assistant 1.00 0.75 1.75
Administrative Assistant - -
Total Community Relations 2.00 - - 0.75 2.75 Human Resources/Risk Management
Human Resources Risk Manager - 1.00 1.00
Human Resources Analyst - 1.00 1.00
Human Resources Analyst/DEI Officer - 1.00 1.00
Management Assistant - -
Total Human Resources/Risk Management - 3.00 - - 3.00 Total General Government 16.90 (1.00) - 1.75 17.65 General Services:

General Services Administration
General Services Director 1.00 1.00
Senior Management Analyst - 1.00 1.00
Management Assistant - 1.00 1.00
Total General Services Administration 1.00 1.00 - 1.00 3.00 City Facilities and Fleet Management
Facilities Maintenance Technician 1.00 1.00
Total City Facilities Management 1.00 - - - 1.00 Information and Communications
Management Analyst 1.00 1.00
Total Information and Communications 1.00 - - - 1.00 Total General Services 3.00 1.00 - 1.00 5.00
Finance:

Finance Administration
Finance Director 1.00 1.00
Accounting Manager 1.00 1.00
Accounting Supervisor - 1.00 1.00
Accountant 2.00 2.00
Budget Analyst 1.00 1.00
Management Assistant 1.00 1.00
Accounting Specialist 3.00 1.00 4.00
Senior Office Specialist 1.00 1.00
Total Finance 10.00 - - 2.00 12.00
349

SCHEDULE OF AUTHORIZED POSITIONS
FISCAL YEAR 2021/22 AND 2022/23
Exhibit B
Department/Positions
FY 21/22 & 22/23
Adopted May
17,2022
Program
Reallocation Reclass
Additions/
Deletions
FY 22/23
Proposed June
21, 2022
Planning Environmental Review
Current Planning
Planning Director - -
Planning Manager 1.00 1.00
Supervising Senior Planner 2.00 2.00 Senior Planner - 1.00 1.00
Associate Planner 4.00 (1.00) 3.00 Management Analyst - -
Code Compliance Officer 2.00 2.00
Assistant Planner - -
Management Assistant - -
Permit Technician 1.00 1.00
Office Specialist 0.50 0.50
Total Current Planning 10.50 - - - 10.50 Advance Planning
Planning Manager 1.00 1.00
Senior Planner 2.00 2.00
Total Advance Planning 3.00 - - - 3.00 Sustainability Program
Sustainability Manager 1.00 1.00
Sustainability Coordinator - -
Management Assistant 1.00 1.00
Total Sustainability Program 2.00 - - - 2.00 Housing Program
Senior Housing Analyst 1.00 1.00
Total Housing Program 1.00 - - - 1.00 Administration
Planning Director 1.00 1.00
Management Assistant 1.00 1.00
Total Administration 2.00 - - - 2.00 Total Planning Environmental Review 18.50 - - - 18.50 Public Works:

Administration
Public Works Director 1.00 1.00
Assistant Public Works Director 1.00 1.00 Senior Management Analyst 1.00 1.00
Mangement Analyst 1.00 1.00
Management Assistant 1.00 1.00
Administrative Assistant - -
Senior Office Specialist - -
Total Administration 5.00 - - - 5.00 Engineering
Principal Civil Engineer 2.00 (1.00) 1.00 Traffic Engineer - -
Assistant Engineer 1.00 1.00
Public Works Inspector 1.00 1.00
Senior Engineering Technician 1.00 1.00 Total Engineering 5.00 (1.00) - - 4.00 Parks & Open Spaces
Parks & Open Spaces Manager 1.00 1.00 Management Assistant - -
Public Works Supervisor 1.00 1.00
Environmental Services Specialist 1.00 1.00 Lead Maintenance Worke r - -
Administrative Assistant 1.00 (1.00) 1.00 1.00 Maintenance Worker II 1.00 1.00
Maintenance Worker I 2.00 1.00 3.00 Total Parks & Open Spaces 7.00 (1.00) - 2.00 8.00 350

Neighborhood Services
Neighborhood Services Director 1.00 1.00 Senior Project Manager - -
Emergency Services Coordinator 1.00 1.00 Management Analyst 1.00 1.00
Management Assistant (1 Full-Time, 1 Part-Time) 1.50 1.50 Total Neighborhood Services 4.50 - - - 4.50 Homelessness
Homelessness Outreach Coordinator - 1.00 1.00 Total Homelessness - - - 1.00 1.00 Economic Development
Principal Project Manager - -
Senior Project Manager - -
Economic Development Coordinato r - - Total Economic Development - - - - - Parks & Recreation
Parks & Recreation Manager 1.00 1.00 Total Parks & Recreation 1.00 - - - 1.00 Community Center
Recreation Supervisor 1.00 1.00
Maintenance Worker I - 1.00 1.00 Administrative Assistant - 1.00 1.00 Total Community Center 1.00 - - 2.00 3.00 351

SCHEDULE OF AUTHORIZED POSITIONS
FISCAL YEAR 2021/22 AND 2022/23
Exhibit B
Department/Positions
FY 21/22 & 22/23
Adopted May
17,2022
Program
Reallocation Reclass
Additions/
Deletions
FY 22/23
Proposed June
21, 2022
Library - Goleta
Library Director - -
Library Director (Assistant Neighborhood Services Director) 1.00 1.00 Supervising Librarian 1.00 1.00
Management Assistant 1.00 1.00
Librarian II/Children's Librarian 1.00 1.00 Library Technician (1 Full-Time, 5 Part-Time) 2.88 2.88 Library Assistant I (3 Full-Time, 4 Part-Time, 2 Part-Time Limited 4.25 1.00 5.25 Total Library - Goleta 11.13 - - 1.00 12.13 Library - Buellton
Senior Library Technician 1.00 1.00
Library Technician (2 Part-Time) 0.75 0.75 Library Assistant I (2 Part-Time) 0.75 0.75 Total Library - Buellton 2.50 - - - 2.50 Library - Solvang
Senior Library Technician 1.00 1.00
Library Technician (4 Part-Time) 1.50 1.50 Total Library - Solvang 2.50 - - - 2.50 Total Neighborhood Services 22.63 - - 4.00 26.63 Grand Total: 100.025 - - 15.750 115.775 #REF!
352

SCHEDULE OF AUTHORIZED POSITIONS
FISCAL YEAR 2021/22 AND 2022/23
Exhibit B
Department/Positions
FY 21/22 & 22/23
Adopted May
17,2022
Program
Reallocation Reclass
Additions/
Deletions
FY 22/23
Proposed June
21, 2022
*Schedule of Proposed Authorized Positions has been summarized to reflect positions in the Departments/Programs by majority of time s On the next page is a detailed schedule of allocations of how positions are budgeted based on time spent *Positions are allocated by budgeted time spent in programs and department:

General Government:

City Manager
City Manager 1.00 1.00
Assistant City Manager 1.00 1.00
Deputy City Manager - -
Assistant to the City Manager 1.00 1.00 Human Resources Risk Manager 1.00 (1.00) - Management Analyst 1.00 1.00
Human Resources Analyst 1.00 (1.00) - Human Resources Analyst/DEI Officer 1.00 (1.00) - Executive Assistant 1.00 1.00
Management Assistant 1.00 (0.75) 0.25 Office Specialist 0.90 0.90
City Hall Receptionist - -
Total City Manager 9.90 (3.75) - - 6.15 City Clerk
City Clerk 1.00 1.00
Deputy City Clerk 2.00 2.00
Public Records Specialist - 1.00 1.00 Records Technician/Recording Clerk - - Total City Clerk 3.00 - - 1.00 4.00 City Attorney
City Attorney - -
Assistant City Attorney 1.00 1.00
Deputy City Attorney - -
Sr. Legal Analyst - -
Management Assistant 1.00 (0.50) 0.50 Total City Attorney 2.00 (0.50) - - 1.50 Community Relations
Community Relations Manager 1.00 1.00 Management Assistant 1.00 0.75 1.75 Administrative Assistant - -
Total Community Relations 2.00 - - 0.75 2.75 Human Resources/Risk Management
Human Resources Risk Manager - 1.00 1.00 Human Resources Analyst - 1.00 1.00 Human Resources Analyst/DEI Officer - 1.00 1.00 Management Assistant - 0.50 0.50 Total Human Resources/Risk Management - 3.50 - - 3.50 Total General Government 16.90 (0.75) - 1.75 17.90 General Services:

General Services Administration
General Services Director 1.00 1.00
Senior Management Analyst - 1.00 1.00 Management Analyst 0.50 0.50
Management Assistant - 0.75 0.75 Total General Services Administration 1.50 0.75 - 1.00 3.25 City Facilities and Fleet Management
Facilities Maintenance Technician 1.00 1.00 Total City Facilities Management 1.00 - - - 1.00 Information and Communications
Management Analyst 0.50 0.50
Total Information and Communications 0.50 - - - 0.50 Total General Services 3.00 0.75 - 1.00 4.75 353

Finance Administration
Finance Director 1.00 1.00
Accounting Manager 1.00 1.00
Accounting Supervisor - 1.00 1.00 Budget Analyst 1.00 1.00
Accountant 2.00 2.00
Management Assistant 1.00 1.00
Accounting Specialist 3.00 1.00 4.00 Senior Office Specialist 1.00 1.00
Total Finance 10.00 - - 2.00 12.00 Planning Environmenal Review:

Current Planning
Planning Director - -
Planning Manager 1.00 1.00
Supervising Senior Planner 2.00 2.00 Senior Planner - 1.00 1.00
Associate Planner 4.00 (1.00) 3.00 Management Analyst - -
Code Compliance Officer 2.00 2.00
Assistant Planner - -
Management Assistant - -
Permit Technician 1.00 1.00
Office Specialist 0.50 0.50
Total Current Planning 10.50 - - - 10.50 Building & Safety
Planning Director - -
Management Assistant - -
Total Building & Safety - - - - - Advance Planning
Planning Director - -
Planning Manager 1.00 1.00
Senior Planner 2.00 2.00
Management Assistant - -
Total Advance Planning 3.00 - - - 3.00 Planning Commission & Design Review Board
Planning Director - -
Management Assistant - -
Total Planning Commission & Design Review Board - - - - - Sustainability Program
Sustainability Manager 1.00 1.00
Sustainability Coordinator - -
Management Assistant 1.00 1.00
Total Sustainability Program 2.00 - - - 2.00 Housing Program
Senior Housing Analyst 1.00 1.00
Total Housing Program 1.00 - - - 1.00 Administration
Planning Director 1.00 1.00
Management Assistant 1.00 1.00
Total Administration 2.00 - - - 2.00 Total Planning Environmental Review 18.50 - - - 18.50 Public Works:

Administration
Public Works Director 1.00 1.00
Assistant Public Works Director 0.50 0.50 Senior Management Analyst 0.50 0.50
Management Analyst 0.50 0.50 1.00 Management Assistant 1.00 1.00
Administrative Assistant - -
Senior Office Specialist - -
Total Administration 3.50 0.50 - - 4.00 354

SCHEDULE OF AUTHORIZED POSITIONS
FISCAL YEAR 2021/22 AND 2022/23
Exhibit B
Department/Positions
FY 21/22 & 22/23
Adopted May
17,2022
Program
Reallocation Reclass
Additions/
Deletions
FY 22/23
Proposed June
21, 2022
Engineering
Assistant Public Works Director 0.25 0.25 Principal Civil Engineer 2.00 (1.00) 1.00 Traffic Engineer - -
Management Analyst 0.25 (0.25) - Assistant Engineer 1.25 (0.25) 1.00 Public Works Inspector 1.00 1.00
Sr. Engineering Technician 1.00 1.00 Management Assistant - -
Administrative Assistant - -
Total Engineering 5.75 (1.50) - - 4.25 Facilities Maintenance
Facilities Maintenance Technician - - Total Facilities Maintenance - - - - - Parks & Open Spaces
Public Works Manager - -
Parks & Open Spaces Manager 1.00 1.00 Public Works Supervisor 0.50 0.50 1.00 Environmental Services Specialist 1.00 1.00 Lead Maintenance Worke r - -
Administrative Assistant 0.50 (0.50) 1.00 1.00 Senior Office Specialist 0.30 (0.30) - Maintenance Worker II 1.00 1.00
Maintenance Worker I 2.00 1.00 3.00 Total Parks & Open Spaces 6.30 (0.30) - 2.00 8.00 Capital Improvement
Public Works Director - -
Assistant Public Works Director 0.25 0.25 Principal Civil Engineer 1.00 1.00 2.00 CIP Manager - -
Sr. Project Engineer 1.00 1.00
Senior Engineer 1.00 1.00
Senior Management Analyst 0.50 0.50
Management Analyst 0.25 (0.25) - Assistant Engineer 1.50 0.25 1.75 Senior Office Specialist 0.30 0.70 1.00 Total Capital Improvement 5.80 0.70 - 1.00 7.50 Street Lighting
Principal Civil Engineer - 1.00 1.00 Assistant Engineer 0.25 1.00 1.25 Total Street Lighting 0.25 1.00 - 1.00 2.25 Street Maintenance
Public Works Director - -
Public Works Manager 1.00 1.00
Management Assistant - -
Administrative Assistant 0.50 0.50 1.00 Public Works Supervisor 0.50 (0.50) 1.00 1.00 Lead Maintenance Worke r - -
Senior Office Specialist 0.40 (0.40) - Maintenance Worker II (1 Underfilling) 3.00 3.00 Maintenance Worker I - 1.00 1.00 Total Street Maintenance 5.40 (0.40) - 2.00 7.00 Solid Waste & Environmental Services
Public Works Director - -
Assistant Public Works Director - - Environmental Services Manager - 1.00 1.00 Environmental Services Coordinator 1.00 (1.00) - Environmental Services Specialist 1.00 1.00 Senior Management Analyst - -
Assistant Engineer - -
Management Analyst - -
Management Assistant - -
Administrative Assistant - 1.00 1.00 Senior Office Specialist - -
Total Solid Waste & Environmental Services 2.00 - - 1.00 3.00 Total Public Works 29.00 - - 7.00 36.00 355

Neighborhood Services Administration
Neighborhood Services Director 0.90 0.90 Principal Project Manager - -
Senior Project Manager - -
Emergency Services Coordintor 1.00 1.00 Management Analyst 0.90 0.90
Management Assistant 1.40 1.40
Total Neighborhood Services 4.20 - - - 4.20 Homelessness
Homelessness Outreach Coordinator - 1.00 1.00 Total Homelessness - - - 1.00 1.00 Economic Development
Principal Project Manager - -
Senior Project Manager - -
Economic Development Coordinato r - - Total Economic Development - - - - - Parks & Recreation
Neighborhood Services Director 0.10 0.10 Parks & Recreation Manager 1.00 1.00 Management Analyst 0.10 0.10
Management Assistant 0.10 0.10
Total Parks & Recreation 1.30 - - - 1.30 Community Center
Recreation Supervisor 1.00 1.00
Maintenance Worker I - 1.00 1.00 Administrative Assistant (GCC) - 1.00 1.00 Total Community Center 1.00 - - 2.00 3.00 Library - Goleta
Library Director - -
Library Director (Assistant Neighborhood Services Director) 1.00 1.00 Supervising Librarian 1.00 1.00
Management Assistant 1.00 1.00
Librarian II/Children's Librarian 1.00 1.00 Library Technician (1 Full-Time, 5 Part-Time) 2.88 2.88 Library Assistant I (3 Full-Time, 4 Part-Time, 2 Part-Time Limited 4.25 1.00 5.25 Total Library - Goleta 11.13 - - 1.00 12.13 Library - Buellton
Senior Library Technician 1.00 1.00
Library Technician (2 Part-Time) 0.75 0.75 Library Assistant I (2 Part-Time) 0.75 0.75 Total Library - Buellton 2.50 - - - 2.50 Library - Solvang
Senior Library Technician 1.00 1.00
Library Technician (4 Part-Time) 1.50 1.50 Total Library - Solvang 2.50 - - - 2.50 Total Neighborhood Services 22.63 - - 4.00 26.63 Grand Total: 100.025 - - 15.75 115.775 356
ATTACHMENT 4:

Fiscal Year 2022/23 Mid-Cycle Budget Presentation
357
FY 2022/23 (Mid-Cycle)
Proposed Operating and
Capital Improvement Program
Budgets and Comprehensive
Capital Improvement Plan
City of Goleta
City Council – Public Hearing
June 21, 2022
358
 Staff Presentation (Recap and Updates since Workshops)  Questions
 Public Comments
 City Council Deliberation and Decision Making
 Recommended Actions
Public Hearing Format
2June 21, 2022, Fiscal Year 2022/23 Mid-Cycle Budget Review 359
 FY 22/23 Recommended Budget is a revision (mid-cycle update) of original that was adopted June 21, 2021 as part of the Two-Year Budget Plan
 Balanced budget, though ongoing unfunded projects and priorities  Operating revenues greater than ongoing expenditures
 One-time expenditures matched by one-time revenues sources (fund balance available for use)  Financial Outlook
 Stable overall financial outlook, though fiscal challenges with ongoing backlog of work efforts, deferred maintenance, unfunded capital projects and other priorities. When included results in structural deficit  City continues to maintain prudent reserves and fund balance to address economic uncertainties  Continued inflation and supply chain disruptions, elevated energy and fuel prices, Federal Reserve actions, unforeseen consequences related to future COVID-19 variants, and geopolitical concerns resulting from the war in Ukraine
Overview - Recap
3June 21, 2022, Fiscal Year 2022/23 Mid-Cycle Budget Review 360
 Financial Outlook – Continued - Ongoing Economic Uncertainties  Inflationary factors are expected to result in higher tax revenues, however offset by higher expenditure and construction costs
 Federal Reserve action of raising the federal funds rate to counter current high inflation, influences Treasury yields, and the City anticipates gradual increases in investment earnings as laddered investments mature and are reinvested in higher market yielding securities, including funds held with LAIF  Fed funds rate also influences borrowing costs, and increases are anticipated if the City issues debt or borrows funds
 City continues to maintain prudent reserves and fund balance to address economic uncertainties , including cost reduction strategies available if needed – Not recommending any cost reduction strategies  Ongoing discussions with tax consultants, though revenues anticipated to be stable, but slowdown on growth. Staff to provide updates through out fiscal year on the financial condition of the City Revised FY 22/23 Budget
4June 21, 2022, Fiscal Year 2022/23 Mid-Cycle Budget Review 361
U.S. Economic Outlook
5 4.1%

1.0%

1.7%

2.8%

3.9% 3.5%

2.8%

2.0%

0.1%
-2.6%

2.7%

1.5%

2.3% 1.8% 2.3% 2.7%

1.7%

2.3%

2.9%

2.3%
-3.4%

5.7%

2.8%

2.0% 1.9%
2000
2001
2002
2003
2004
2005
2006
2007
2008
2009
2010
2011
2012
2013
2014
2015
2016
2017
2018
2019
2020
2021
2022
2023
2024
Source: UCLA Anderson Forecast, June 2022
Average Annual Growth Rate of Real GDP

4.1%

1.0%

1.7%

2.8%

3.9% 3.5%

2.8%

2.0%

0.1%
-2.6%

2.7%

1.5%

2.3% 1.8%

2.3% 2.7%

1.7%

2.3%

2.9%

2.3%
-3.4%

5.7%

4.3%

2.8%

2.3%
2000
2001
2002
2003
2004
2005
2006
2007
2008
2009
2010
2011
2012
2013
2014
2015
2016
2017
2018
2019
2020
2021
2022
2023
2024
Source: UCLA Anderson Forecast, March 2022
Average Annual Growth Rate of Real GDP
UCLA Anderson Forecast, June 2022:
 U.S. economic growth will likely slow to 2.8% in 2022, followed by 2.0%
in 2023 and 1.9% in 2024. Just a few
months ago, the forecast was for growth of 4.3%, 2.8%
and 2.3%, respectively, for the same years.
 On a quarterly basis, the Forecast expects the depth of the economic slowdown and the high
est risk of
recession to occur in the middle of 2023
 By the end of 2022 and into 2023, as the impact of the Federal Reserve’s in
terest rate increases begin to bite, UCLA Forecast
expect growth to slow to below 2%. Only by the end of 2024 they expect GDP growth to pick back up to trend rates.
 With that economic slowdown, the level of GDP is expected to remain below what it
would have been had the pandemic
never occurred. That is, real GDP is not expected to return to its long-term trend even by the end of 2024. Unemployment will likely rise in 2023 as the Fed increases interest rates and the economy slows.

June 21, 2022, Fiscal Year 2022/23 Mid-Cycle Budget Review 362
U.S. Economic Outlook
6 UCLA Anderson Forecast, June 2022
 The forecast for inflation does not see
consumer prices easing any time soon and cal
ls
for 7.4% year-over-year inflation, as measured
by the consumer price index, by the end of
2022, falling to 2.2% by the end of 2023.
 Fed to raise interest rates at each of its
meetings for the rest of the year
. Most recently
June 15, with a 0.75 percentage-point increase
to a range of 1.5-1.75%. The forecast expects
the federal funds rate to peak between 3.75%
and 4.0% in mid-2023
 Next Fed next meeting dates in 2022: 7/27/22, 9/21/22, 11/2/22 and 12/14/22  Future UCLA Anderson Forecast Updates: 9/21/22 – September 2022 Economic Outlook , 12/7/22 – December 2022 Economic Outlook  BLS CPI Releases: 7/13/22 - June 2022 CPI Data (monthly releases usually about 10 to 13 days into the month) June 21, 2022, Fiscal Year 2022/23 Mid-Cycle Budget Review 363
Budget Updates – Revenues
7June 21, 2022, Fiscal Year 2022/23 Mid-Cycle Budget Review Property Tax
$8,478,600
23%
Sales Tax
$8,316,500
23%Transient Occupancy Tax
$13,100,000
36%
Franchise Fee Tax
$1,408,900
4%
Cannabis Tax
$2,100,000
6%
Licenses & Service Charges
$1,687,300
5%
Misc Revenue
$949,800
3%
DIF
$2,453,400
4%
General Fund
$36,041,100
55%
Grants
$15,554,925
23%
RDA & Other
$1,161,344
2%
Special Revenue Funds
$10,638,139
16%
Total All Funds Revenues - $65.8 millionTotal General Fund Revenues - $36 million 364
General Government
$6,218,750
14%
General Services
$3,281,675
7%
Library
$434,600
1%
Finance
$1,789,500
4%
Planning and
Environmental Review
$4,293,800
10%
Public Works
$8,098,300
18%
Neighborhood Services
$2,074,600
5%
Public Safety
$9,766,000
22%
Non-Departmental
$858,000
2%
Capital Improvement Projects
$7,260,078
17%
Budget Updates – Expenditures
8June 21, 2022, Fiscal Year 2022/23 Mid-Cycle Budget Review Total General Fund Expenditures by Department - $44 million Salaries and
Benefits
$14,567,500
33%
Supplies and Services
$21,711,225
49%
CIP and other Capital
$7,796,578
18%
Total General Fund Expenditures by Category - $44 million 365
General Government
$6,368,750
8%
General Services
$3,281,675
4% Library Services
$2,791,800
4%
Finance
$1,789,500
2%
Planning & Environmental
Review
$4,295,800
5%
Public Works
$12,810,917
16%
Neighborhood Services
$3,598,171
4%
Police Services
$9,922,700
12%
Non-Departmental
$2,083,788
3%
CIP
$34,239,114
42%
Budget Updates – Expenditures
9June 21, 2022, Fiscal Year 2022/23 Mid-Cycle Budget Review Total All Funds Expenditures by Department - $81.2 million Salaries and
Benefits
$17,096,400
21%
Supplies and Services
$29,310,201
36%
CIP and other
Capital
$34,775,614
43%
Total All Funds Expenditures by Category - $81.2 million 366
Personnel Expenditures
10 Summary of Recommended New Personnel:

June 21, 2022, Fiscal Year 2022/23 Mid-Cycle Budget Review Department Program Title FY 22/23
Proposed FTE
General Government City Clerk Public Records Specialist 113,000$ 1.00 General Services General Services AdministrationSenior Management Analyst 158,600$ 1.00 General Services Fleet Management Department Aides 22,100$ - Finance Finance Administration Accounting Supervisor 148,500$ 1.00 Finance Finance Administration Accounting Specialist 93,000$ 1.00 Public Works Parks & Open Space Administrative Assistant 99,100$ 1.00 Public Works Parks & Open Space Maintenance Worker I 78,400$ 1.00 Public Works Capital Improvement ProgramPrincipal Civil Engineer 200,000$ 1.00 Public Works Street Lighting Assistant Engineer 129,000$ 1.00 Public Works Streets Maintenance Public Works Supervisor 106,100$ 1.00 Public Works Streets Maintenance Maintenance Worker I 78,400$ 1.00 Public Works Solid Waste & EnvironmentalAdministrative Assistant** 99,100$ 1.00 Neighborhood Services Library Services (Goleta) Library Assistant I* 74,600$ 1.00 Neighborhood Services Community Center Maintenance Worker I*** 78,400$ 1.00 Neighborhood Services Community Center Administrative Assistant*** 99,100$ 1.00 Neighborhood Services Neighborhood Services
Homelessness Services
Coordinator 159,000$ 1.00
Total 1,736,400$ 15.00
1,381,400$ 11.00
78,400$ 1.00
99,100$ 1.00
177,500$ 2.00
**Solid Waste Fund
General Fund
*County Per Capita & Library Special Tax
***Community Center Fund
Summary of Recommended Reclassifications:

Department Program Title and Description FY 22/23
Proposed FTE
General Government Community Relations
Management Assistant
reclassified from 0.25FTE to 1.0
FTE 75,200$ 0.25
Planning & Environmental
Review Current Planning
Associate Planner (Grade
110)reclassified to Senior Planner
(Grade 112) 19,700$ -
Public Works Solid Waste &
Environmental Services
Environmental Services
Coordinator (Grade 112)
reclassified to Envrionmental
Services Manager (Grade 114)* $12,300 -
Total 107,200$ 0.25
General Fund 94,900$ 0.25
*Solid Waste Fund 12,300$ -
Summary of FTEs by Department:

Department FY 18/19
Adopted
FY 19/20
Adopted
FY 20/21
Adopted
FY 21/22
Amended
FY 22/23
Proposed
General Government 15.65 17.65 17.65 16.90 17.65 General Services - - 3.00 5.00 Library 9.38 15.38 15.38 16.13 17.13 Finance 7.00 7.00 7.00 10.00 12.00 Planning & Environmental Review 15.00 17.50 17.50 18.50 18.50 Public Works 22.90 25.65 25.90 29.00 36.00 Neighborhood Services 5.00 6.00 6.00 6.50 9.50 Total 74.93 89.18 89.43 100.03 115.78 367
Personnel Vacancies
11June 21, 2022, Fiscal Year 2022/23 Mid-Cycle Budget Review  12 existing vacant positions and 15 requested vacant positions, totaling 27 vacancies
 Position vacancies valued at $3.5 million, at $3.2 million for the General Fund
 Anticipated salary savings, however, departments may utilize vacancy savings for contract with consultants or temporary staff to supplement work efforts
 Vacancy salary savings also anticipated to support recently approved hiring incentive policy and potential employee retention incentives Type Department Program Title FY 22/23
Proposed FTE
Existing General Services Information Technology Management Analyst 129,400$ 1.00 Existing Finance Finance Administration Accounting Specialist 93,000$ 1.00 Existing
Planning & Environmental
Review Current Planning Code Enforcement Officer 120,000$ 1.00 Existing
Planning & Environmental
Review Current Planning Code Enforcement Officer 120,000$ 1.00 Existing Public Works Administration Assistant Public Works Director 217,000$ 1.00 Existing Public Works Engineering Principal Civil Engineer 200,000$ 1.00 Existing Public Works Engineering Senior Engineering Technician 112,000$ 1.00 Existing Public Works Parks & Open Space Maintenance Worker I 78,400$ 1.00 Existing Public Works
Capital Improvement
Program Principal Civil Engineer 200,000$ 1.00
Existing Public Works
Capital Improvement
Program Senior Engineer 171,000$ 1.00
Existing Public Works
Traffic Engineering
Ops/Mtnce Principal Civil Engineer 200,000$ 1.00 Existing Neighborhood Services Parks & Recreation Recreation Supervisor 147,000$ 1.00 New General Government City Clerk Public Records Specialist 113,000$ 1.00 New General Services
General Services
Administration Senior Management Analyst 158,600$ 1.00 New General Services Fleet Management Department Aides 22,100$ - New Finance Finance Administration Accounting Supervisor 148,500$ 1.00 New Finance Finance Administration Accounting Specialist 93,000$ 1.00 New Public Works Parks & Open Space Administrative Assistant 99,100$ 1.00 New Public Works Parks & Open Space Maintenance Worker I 78,400$ 1.00 New Public Works
Capital Improvement
Program Principal Civil Engineer 200,000$ 1.00
New Public Works
Traffic Engineering
Ops/Mtnce Assistant Engineer 129,000$ 1.00
New Public Works Streets Maintenance Public Works Supervisor 106,100$ 1.00 New
Public Works Streets Maintenance Maintenance Worker I 78,400$ 1.00 New Public Works
Solid Waste &
Environmental Administrative Assistant** 99,100$ 1.00 New Neighborhood Services Library Services (Goleta) Library Assistant I* 74,600$ 1.00 New Neighborhood Services Community Center Maintenance Worker I*** 78,400$ 1.00 New Neighborhood Services Community Center Administrative Assistant*** 99,100$ 1.00 New Neighborhood Services Neighborhood Services
Homelessness Services
Coordinator 159,000$ 1.00
Total 3,524,200$ 27.00
General Fund 3,173,000$ 23.00
*County Per Capita & Library Special Tax 74,600$ 1.00 **Solid Waste Fund 99,100$ 1.00
***Community Center Fund 177,500$ 2.00
368
Potential Employee Incentives
12June 21, 2022, Fiscal Year 2022/23 Mid-Cycle Budget Review  At the budget workshop, City Council provided feedback on wanting to do more financially for current employees due to the high inflationary environment and help wi
th employee retention.
 The feedback and suggestions provided were to evaluate options that help employees financially but will not have an impact on pension liabilities.
 Some of the suggestions
included one-time retention bonuses, evaluating the current TDM program and alternative transportation benefit, and citywide compensation rev
iew to ensure we are meeting are targeted levels. Staff have met and discussed potential employee incentive options, evaluating the pros and cons, short-term and long-term impacts, and which would apply to all eligible employees.
 Staff is now needing to meet with Service Employees International Union (SEIU), Local 620, discuss its options and recommendations.
 Employee incentives are anticipated be finalized in July and brought back to City Council at that time.  Staff anticipate one-time costs to be approximately $100,000, which can be absorbed in the proposed budget due to anticipated salary savings of current vacant and
new vacant positions of $3.1 million.
369
General Fund
FY 22/23
Proposed
FY 23/24
Projected
FY 24/25
Projected
FY 25/26
Projected
FY 26/27
Projected
Beginning Fund Balance $ 25,694,342 $ 17,660,139 $ 17,405,027 $ 18,016,373 $ 19,709,571 Operating Revenues 36,041,100 36,960,980 37,957,290 38,999,740 40,091,290 Operating Expenditures 34,046,225 35,142,392 36,219,944 37,306,542 38,425,738 Net Operating Revenues 1,994,875 1,818,588 1,737,346 1,693,198 1,665,552 One-Time Revenues or
Use of Fund Balance 10,029,078 2,073,700 1,126,000 - - One-Time Expenditures 10,029,078 2,073,700 1,126,000 - - Total Expenditures 44,075,303 37,216,092 37,345,944 37,306,542 38,425,738 Net Change to Fund
Balance $ (8,034,203) $ (255,112) $ 611,346 $ 1,693,198 $ 1,665,552 Ending Fund Balance $ 17,660,139 $ 17,405,027 $ 18,016,373 $ 19,709,571 $ 21,375,123 General Fund
FY 22/23
Proposed
FY 23/24
Projected
FY 24/25
Projected
FY 25/26
Projected
FY 26/27
Projected
Fund Balance Categories
Prepaids and Deposits 25,674 25,674 25,674 25,674 25,674 Public Facilities 830,108 830,108 830,108 830,108 830,108 Capital Equipment 658,579 658,579 658,579 658,579 658,579 Compensated Leave 404,111 404,111 404,111 404,111 404,111 Risk Management 200,000 200,000 200,000 200,000 200,000 Litigation Defense 300,000 300,000 300,000 300,000 300,000 Contingency 11,235,254 11,561,435 11,908,278 12,265,526 12,633,492 City Hall Solar Removal 94,500 94,500 94,500 94,500 94,500 Street Maintenance $2,200,000
Sustainability - - - - -

OPEB UAL - - - - - CalPERS Pension UAL - - - - - CIP Project Carryovers/Encumbrances - - - - - Encumbrances (Operating) - - - - - FMV Adjustment 78,720 78,720 78,720 78,720 78,720 Unassigned Fund Balance $1,633,192 3,251,900 3,516,403 4,852,353 6,149,939 Ending Fund Balance 17,660,139$ 17,405,027$ 18,016,373$ 19,709,571$ 21,375,123$ General Fund – Fund Balance
13 Does not include the deferred maintenance or ongoing funding needed for other priorities and projects,
otherwise positive in near term.

Projected one-time expenditures. CIP , Operating and
DOF/RDA Settlement. DOF/RDA Settlement ending June
30, 2025.

Remains at 33% of operating budget.

June 21, 2022, Fiscal Year 2022/23 Mid-Cycle Budget Review Staff recommends $3 million be held for use throughout fiscal year .

Was previously $3.8 million, though $2.2 million set aside for Street Maintenance to help meet PCI average 67.

Staff recommends $1.5 million for revenue volatility
370
Capital Improvement Program
14June 21, 2022, Fiscal Year 2022/23 Mid-Cycle Budget Review  Comprehensive CIP Project List (Comprehensive Capital Improvement Plan)  Five-Year CIP Project List
 Annual Work Program Projects
 Five-Year CIP Budget
 Summary by Fund, Summary by Project, Project Detail Sheets  Total project costs estimated at $338 million
 Total project costs to complete at $249 million
 New FY 22/23 appropriations – $34.2 million
 FY 22/23 has unfunded amounts of $14.2 million
 Total unfunded estimated at $103 million
 Includes TBD -Possible Grants and Other Sources of $3.9 million 371
Capital Improvement Program
15June 21, 2022, Fiscal Year 2022/23 Mid-Cycle Budget Review Proposed New/Modified CIP Projects
 San Jose Creek Channel Fish-Passage Modification Project (Project No. 9117)  Ellwood Coastal Trails and Habitat Restoration (Project No. 9118)  Ellwood Beach Drive Drainage Repair (Project No. 9119)  Evergreen Park Drainage Repair (Project No. 9120)
 Goleta Community Center ADA Improvements (Project No. 9121)  Fairview and Stow Canyon Traffic Signal and Intersection Improvements (Project No. 9124)  Rectangular Rapid Flashing Beacons (RRFBs) Calle Real at Jenna (Project No. 9125)  Lake Los Carneros Pedestrian Bridge (TBD)
Proposed Master Plan and Capital Maintenance Projects
 City-Wide Open Space Management and Maintenance (Project No. 9122)  Lake Los Carneros Master Plan (Project No. 9123)
372
Capital Improvement Program
16June 21, 2022, Fiscal Year 2022/23 Mid-Cycle Budget Review #
Project
Number Project Name
Total
Project Cost Unfunded
Programmed in FY
22/23
Adjusted
Unfunded
Amount
Construction
Year Funding Strategy
1 9002 (R1) Ekwill Street & Fowler
Road Extensions * 33,515,381 1,406,416 1,406,416 - FY 22/23 Pay-go 2 9121 Goleta Community
Center ADA 3,210,371 2,939,070 2,939,070 - FY 22/23 Pay-go 3 9025 Fire Station 10 21,608,686 13,447,939 - 13,447,939 FY 22/23 Debt, 30 years 4 9113 Mathilda Park
Improvements 524,252 377,650 377,650 - FY 22/23 Pay-go 5 9006
San Jose Creek Bike
Path - Northern &
Southern Segments
27,902,828 3,705,000 - 3,705,000 FY 23/24 Pay-go 6 9067 Goleta Community
Center Improvements 12,857,282 2,300,000 - 2,300,000 FY 23/24 Pay-go 7 9124 Fairview and Stow
Canyon Traffic Signal & 2,200,000 2,000,000 - 2,000,000 FY 23/24 Pay-go 8 9063 Evergreen Park
Improvements 3,220,000 1,000,000 - 1,000,000 FY 23/24 Pay-go 9 9074 Stow Grove Park
Master Plan & 5,950,000 3,963,648 - 3,963,648 FY 24/25 Pay-go 10 9027 (R5) Goleta US 101
Overcrossing * 48,594,613 38,000,000 - 38,000,000 FY 25/26 Debt, 30 years 159,583,413 69,139,723 4,723,136 64,416,587 Total Project Costs CIP Funding Strategy Update from CIP Budget Workshop
 Projects listed were identified as top
priority from Annual Work Program and
estimated construction date
 Highlighted in yellow show what is now
funded
 Funding strategies are contingent upon
new revenues made available
 No capacity to fund now or take on debt,
will have to wait over time if one-time
funds build up and continue deferring
 Goleta Community Center Improvements
(9067) and Goleta Community Center
ADA (9121) needs further evaluation and
depending which needs to happen first,
no capacity to fund both in FY 22/23
without new revenue sources
373
Unfunded Priorities
17 Long-Range Financial Forecast Recap:
 Ongoing unfunded liabilities (pensions and retiree health care)  CalPERS UAL: $3.5 million OPEB UAL: $2.4 million
 Funding strategy for Section 115 Trust to be discussed at future meeting  Ongoing deferred maintenance
 Ongoing annual deferred maintenance $9.0 million (includes additional pavement budget of $3.3 million to maintain average PCI of 67.  Implementation of master plan documents
 Examples: Bicycle and Pedestrian Master Plan, the Creek and Watershed Plan, Strategic Energy and Climate Action Plan, and future Economic Development Strategic Plan
 Unfunded CIP projects – Updated since workshops – Costs to increase with deferment  Updated amount estimated at $99 million and to be determined amount (potential grants) at $4 million, totaling $103 million June 21, 2022, Fiscal Year 2022/23 Mid-Cycle Budget Review 374
Gann Appropriations Limit
18 Gann Limit to be calculated and adopted every fiscal year by resolution (Attachment 2) Gann Limit sets ceiling amount for tax-funded government services  Annually adjusted based on changes in population, inflation, per capita personal income or percentage change in the local assessment roll from preceding year for addition of local nonresidential new construction  Any significant amount of tax revenue received above the Gann Limit may result in future tax rebates or tax cuts  FY 2022/23 Gann Limit is $72,487,276
 7.70% increase from prior year of $67,304,450
 Only $32,440,121 of City Revenues subject to limit
 Currently $40,047,156 under the limit
June 21, 2022, Fiscal Year 2022/23 Mid-Cycle Budget Review 375
Recommendations and Looking Ahead
19June 21, 2022, Fiscal Year 2022/23 Mid-Cycle Budget Review  Recommendations
 Adopt Resolution No. 22-___, entitled, “A Resolution of the City Council of the City of Goleta, California Amending the Two-Year Budget Plan for Fiscal Y
ears 2021/22 and 2022/23 and Comprehensive Capital Improvement Plan.”  Adopt Resolution No. 22-__ entitled, “A Resolution of the City Council of the City of Goleta, California, Adopting the City’s GANN Limit for Fiscal Year 2022/23.”
 Adopt Resol
ution No. 22-__ entitled, “A Resolution of the City Council of the City of Goleta, California, Adopting a Schedule of Authorized Positions and the City of
Goleta Salary Schedule and Classification Plan for Fiscal Year 2021/22 and Fiscal Year 2022/23 and Adding New Classification Specifications.”
 Looking Ahead
 August TBD – First key sales tax update for Q1 – 2022 with tax consultants  August TBD – Updated CalPERS Actuarial Report
 September 20 – FY 21/22 Fourth Quarter Financial Review (Unaudited)  November 8 – General Election
 December TBD – Annual Comprehensive Financial Report (Audited) for FY 21/22 376
Priority Spending Plan
20June 21, 2022, Fiscal Year 2022/23 Mid-Cycle Budget Review  Recap of Priority Spending Plan Workshop and Background  Goleta has weathered the pandemic and associated economic challenges using a hiring freeze and postponing capital maintenance and improvements.
 However
, even prior to the pandemic, the City did not have sufficient funding to keep up with capital asset depreciation and investments in infrastructure.
 City
revenues are sufficient to get by, but not enough to achieve goals in the City Council’s Strategic Plan or address the backlog of critical deferred maintenance.
 City revenues are also reduced because of the Revenue Neutrality Agreement (RNA) between the City and the County.
377
21 What if Goleta
does not
address its
deferred
maintenance?
Failing to address deferred maintenance and backlog of priorities will result in increasing costs and other issues, including safety hazards, health risks, compliance issues, costly emergency repairs, reduced equipment efficiency, shorter asset life cycles, poor quality facilities, and employee retention challenges.
99M 118M 134M 148M 161M 170M 179M 184M 190M 196M 202M
FY 21/22 FY 22/23 FY 23/24 FY 24/25 FY 25/26 FY 26/27 FY 27/28 FY 28/29 FY 29/30 FY 30/31 FY 31/32 Cost of Continued Deferred CIP (Unfunded Portion Only)
$10.3M annual average increase
9M 11M 12M 14M 15M 15M 19M 24M 29M
36M
45M
FY 21/22 FY 22/23 FY 23/24 FY 24/25 FY 25/26 FY 26/27 FY 27/28 FY 28/29 FY 29/30 FY 30/31 FY 31/32 Cost of Continued Deferred Maintenance
$5.8M annual increase
$1.3M annual average increase
Costs of Deferred Maintenance
378
22 What happens if
Goleta does not
have the
additional funding
for its pavement
program?
Pavement Program
• Goleta will struggle to keep up with the PCI average goal of 67 and roads will continue to deteriorate
at a faster pace
• At current funding levels, PCI levels will continue to drop and reach a PCI level of 50 by FY 30/31. Anything below 55 is considered to be in “poor” condition, and may result in in costly rec
onstruction
instead of maintenance
20/21 21/22 22/23 23/24 24/25 25/26 26/27 27/28 28/29 29/30 30/31 Increase to PCI Goals - ($5.8M) 62 67 67 67 67 67 67 67 67 67 67 Maintain 63 - ($4.7M) 62 63 63 63 63 63 63 63 63 63 63
Current Budget - ($2.5M) 62 62 61 60 58 57 56 54 53 51 50 Zero budget 62 61 58 56 54 51 48 46 43 40 37
30 35
40 45
50 55
60 65
70 PCI RANGE
PAVEMENT CONDITION INDEX - 10 YEAR PROJECTION
379
General Fund Impacts and Deferred Maintenance
$0
$10,000,000
$20,000,000
$30,000,000
$40,000,000
$50,000,000
$60,000,000
$70,000,000
$80,000,000
$90,000,000
$100,000,000
FY 21/22 FY 22/23 FY 23/24 FY 24/25 FY 25/26 FY 26/27 FY 27/28 FY 28/29 FY 29/30 FY 30/31 FY 31/32 General Fund Forecast: Revenues and Expenditures with Deferred Maintenance Surplus (Deficit) General Fund Revenues Total Expenditures Expenditures outpace Revenues
Ongoing Annual Deficit
-$50,000,000
-$45,000,000
-$40,000,000
-$35,000,000
-$30,000,000
-$25,000,000
-$20,000,000
-$15,000,000
-$10,000,000
-$5,000,000
$0
FY 21/22 FY 22/23 FY 23/24 FY 24/25 FY 25/26 FY 26/27 FY 27/28 FY 28/29 FY 29/30 FY 30/31 FY 31/32 Net Operating Revenue with Deferred Maintenance
Ongoing Annual Deficit
Average Years: 5 Years 10 Years
Average Annual Surplus (Deficit) $ (12,100,172) $ (20,736,093) Average Annual Deficit Increase
Per Year $ (1,295,627) $ (3,526,055)
Average Annual Deficit Growth
Rate 12.8% 18.7%
 Goleta cannot afford critical deferred maintenance or continue to keep putting off critical maint
enance without facing significant cost increases
 The City is at risk should another unanticipated emergency repair be needed, like the Cathedral Oak
s Cribwall Repair Project
 In an event of an emergency, the City will have to look at using the contingency reserve
, possible lines of credit and reducing
service levels permanently to afford debt service for an emergency repair
 The charts assumes the City’s current revenue stream and expenditures, with deferred
maintenance programmed in
 A significant ongoing deficit exists and will further increase when maintenance items bec
ome major structural repairs
or replacements which will experience significant cost
increases
23 380
24 Sample Sales
Tax Ballot
Language
• Ballot Language must be very general about what funds will be used for .
• Sample Ballot Language below:
• “T
o maintain City of Goleta services, to address public
health emergencies and natural disasters, support
public safety and 911 response, clean and maintain
public areas, ret
ain local businesses and jobs, maintain
open spaces, repair streets, address homelessness and
provide other general City services, shall a measure be adopted establishing a 1¢ sales tax providing
approximately $10,600,000 annually until ended by
voters, requiring annual independent audits with all
funds staying in Goleta?”
381
Spending Plan
25 The Council may wish to approve a
plan for how to allocate potential
new sales tax revenue to ensure that:
• Funds go to the highest priority
projects and purposes, and
• Instead of a backlog of unfunded
capital projects, stra
tegic plans,
and degrading roads, the
community will see progress and
accomplishments.

The plan can be revised each year or
two, as conditions warrant
382
Spending Plan
26 • Staff will walk Council through a
prioritization process with a
tracking
spreadsheet
• Council can engage in a ranking
process to identify their key
priorities
• Community members
are
encouraged to provide
input on
spending priorities
• Subject to Council direction,
priorities not listed can be
incorporated
in the Spending
Plan
383
Spending Plan
27 See excel spreadsheet
384
ATTACHMENT 5:

Copy of June 14, 2022 Staff Report - Priority Spending Plan Workshop for Enhanced Sales Tax Revenues
385
Agenda Item A.1

WORKSHOP
Meeting Date: June 14, 2022

TO: Mayor and Councilmembers

FROM: Michelle Greene, City Manager

CONTACT: Luke Rioux, Finance Director

SUBJECT: Priority Spending Plan Workshop for Enhanced Sales Tax Revenues

RECOMMENDATIONS:

Provide input, feedback and policy direction related to a draft Priority Spending Plan for new revenue generated by a potential 1¢ Sales Tax.

BACKGROUND:

On June 7, 2022, the City Council provided direction to staff to move forward with an ordinance to place a 1% (1¢ per dollar) sales tax on the ballot for the November 2022 General Election.

The City has over $104 Million in unfunded Capital Improvement Program (CIP) Projects, $9 million in annual deferred maintenance costs for pavement and other assets, and a significant number of strategic and master plan documents reflecting community priorities that lack a source of ongoing revenue to implement. The City’s current sales tax rate is tied for the lowest sales tax in Santa Barbara County. This is exacerbated by the Revenue Neutrality Agreement (RNA) with the County of Santa Barbara , which further limits the funds available for Goleta community priorities. The November 2022 sales tax measure provides a significant opportunity for voters to address the needs of the Goleta community now and into the future. Should the voters approve the measure, it is estimated to raise $10,600,000 per year for general government purposes.

The proposed sales tax measure will be a general tax. A tax is general when its revenues are placed into the general fund and are available for expenditure for any and all government purposes. It will give the City the flexibility needed to addres s the various community priorities, unfunded CIP projects, deferred maintenance of roads and facilities and support public safety and library services. A tax is ‘special’ when its proceeds are earmarked or dedicated in some manner to a specific project or projects or specific function. Because a special tax requires supermajority approval of County voters, rather than a simple majority required for a general tax, it is important that the City not make binding promises to dedicate general tax revenue to a particular project or initiative.

1 386
Meeting Date: June 14, 2022

Page 2 of 7 ends

However, Council can declare its spending priorities and intentions to the public in a non- binding discussion, or even adopt a spending policy document that does not formally bind them to a future course of action. This spending policy document will then i nform the future programming of the new tax revenue source during the annual budget process.

DISCUSSION:

The discussion at this workshop is designed to identify potential areas of spending that the new sales tax revenue could address, and to seek input, feedback and policy direction from the City Council for use in developing a Priority Spending Plan for the enhanced sales tax revenues. While the money raised by the sales tax measure would go a long way to addressing identified needs, it will not address all the needs, or allow needs to be addressed simultaneously, so Council will need to prioritize spending in the short - and long-term.

As part of thi s discussion, community members are encouraged to provide input during the public comment period on spending priorities in the event a sales tax measure is approved by voters. Priorities not listed can then be incorporated into the list subject to Council direction. S taff will walk Council through a prioritization process. Finance Department staff will share a spreadsheet that will allow Council to view the list of priorities and various spending scenarios for the additional revenue over the first several years that the measure is in effect. Council will be asked to engage in a ranking process to identify their key priorities.

Staff will present suggested placeholder starting allocations in the spreadsheet, but it is important to note that staff fully expect that Council may wish to change these allocations, which is the purpose of the workshop. Potential areas for prioritization will include those that cannot be addressed with current funding levels, such as the following.

1. Capital Improvement Program (CIP) Projects

The City’s Capital Improvement Program (CIP) starts with the Comprehensive CIP Project List. The Comprehensive CIP Project List is comprised of a list of capital projects that improve or add to the City’s public infrastructure and facilities. Capital projects are generally large-scale endeavors in terms of investment of staff time, cost, size and benefit to the community. Typically, the CIP is comprised of projects with a total cost of $100,000 or greater and will have a life span of more than 5 years. The list may also include, from time to time, significant purchases of new or replacement equipment and other assets.

Once the Comprehensiv e CIP Project List is established, priority projects are identified from the list each year, budgeted and included in the Five-Year CIP Plan (Five-Year CIP).

Projects included in the Five-Year CIP will be actively worked on over the next five years.

The proposed FY 2022/23 CIP Budget has a total cost to complete budget of $249 million over the next five years. FY 2022/23 CIP Plan Project List includes 41 projects (36 capital projects and 5 master plans) with a total estimated project cost of over $225 million. Staff has, with the assistance from its financial consultants, identified a funding gap of $109 2 387
Meeting Date: June 14, 2022

Page 3 of 7 ends

million for the Five-Year CIP. Of this amount, $5.2 million has been identified to possibly have a potential grant or other revenue source that is to be determined, leaving over $104 million still unfunded.

At the CIP Budget Workshop held on June 8, 2022, staff presented funding strategies to address only the active CIP projects listed in FY 22/23 Annual Work Program Projects.

There are a total of 41 CIP projects with 11 projects that were identified with unfunded amounts of $69.1 million (an amount for Lake Los C arneros Pedestrian Bridge has not been identified). Based on the funding strategies, only $4.7 million can be supported with current revenue sources, leaving a continued gap of $64.4 million.

Some of the key capital projects that still have unfunded amounts include the construction of Fire Station 10 serving the western part of the City, the replacement of the Lake Los Carneros Pedestrian Bridge, and needed improvements to the Goleta Community Center.

Without the additional revenue source from the proposed sales tax, many of the projects included in the CIP cannot be completed.

Moving forward, Council could include a regular additional allocation in the Priority Spending Plan to make progress toward the accomplishment of the identified Five-Year CIP projects each year . Staff has provided an updated CIP Project List (Attachment 1) that summarizes the 5 -Year CIP projects by total project costs estimated unfunded amounts and reorganized to show the Annual Work Program projects first.

2. Pavement Program Deficit

The City of Goleta’s paved roadway surface, typically asphalt concrete, has a replacement value of $221 million, making just the pavement itself the most valuable asset the City owns. Pavement maintenance ranges from pothole repair and crack sealing to slurry seals, overlays and reconstructions. The current 2022 Pavement Rehabilitation Project priority list includes roadway pavement work es timated at $6 million per year, however the existing budget is approximately $2.6 million per year. This leaves a significant unfunded annual deferred maintenance cost of $3.4 million per year.

Underspending on maintenance of roadways increases safety co ncerns and, ultimately, costs will be significantly higher when the roadways eventually d o receive maintenance.

When regular maintenance has not been performed, paved surfaces will need to be reconstructed much sooner. The reconstruction of a roadway will typically cost several times that of the cost of having performed regular maintenance over a period of years.

Due to deferred maintenance, t he most recent independent engineers report rated two - thirds of Goleta’s streets and roads as “fair,” “poor,” or “failed.”

In the professional polling conducted four times over the last several years, Goleta residents consistently identified road maintenance as one of their most important priorities. Moving forward, Council could include a regular additional allocatio n in the Priority Spending Plan to close the deficit in pavement maintenance and reduce the safety impacts and long-term costs of deferred maintenance.

3 388
Meeting Date: June 14, 2022

Page 4 of 7 ends

3. Critical Maintenance Backlog

This category includes the significant identified backlog in addressin g needed facility improvements, fixture and equipment replacements, and the establishment of replacement reserves. It also includes a backlog of maintaining other non -pavement assets in the community like public street trees and concrete, and parks and open space features. When Goleta incorporated twenty years ago, it inherited several old buildings from the County, including an aging library, the now 94 -year-old community center, the Stow House and Historic Train Depot, all of which already had a backlog of needed maintenance. The City now also owns the Corporation Yard Building and a 44,000 - square-foot City Hall. These properties must be properly maintained to preserve their value over the long term. To do this, we must catch up on the deferred maintenance, and develop and fund a maintenance and replacement schedule for each facility.

Staff have estimated an approximate $9 million critical maintenance backlog. This is likely an underestimate, and staff are in the process of developing and/or updating various maintenance and replacement plans that should further quantify this need As with other types of deferred maintenance, failin g to address needs in the short term can increase costs in the future by leading to the early degradation of assets and continued rising construction costs. At the time of preparing this report, the California Construction Cost Index (CCCI) has increased b y 16.7% for May 2022 . The C CCI is produced by the California Department of General Services.

In recent public opinion polling conducted on behalf of the City by a polling consultant , residents identified infrastructure preservation as a high priority. Moving forward, Council could include a regular additional allocation in the Priority Spending Plan to reduce the safety impacts and long-term costs of deferred maintenance on our facilities.

4. Important Community Master Plans

Over the years, the City Council has sought input from stakeholders and the community at large at various times about the community’s priorities and has created various strategic plans that set forth a path to achieve them. Council sets forth its most immediate goals and objectives for the upcoming two-year budget cycle in the Two-Year Strategic Plan, which then get incorporated in the Two-Year Financial Plan and the annual Work Program. To the extent that we can, we include priorities from these important community master plans and make progress toward achieving the goals they outline. However, due to limited funds and staff resources, many of the objectives outlined in these plans just can’t be included.

A partial list of these plans is:
 Homelessness Strategic Plan : Provides important direction and clarity around needs, service gaps, and priorities in order to make effective and strategic funding decisions that serve both the existing homeless population, as well as those at risk of becoming homeless , and to address the impac ts of homelessness in the community.
4 389
Meeting Date: June 14, 2022

Page 5 of 7 ends

 Creek and Watershed Master Plan : Includes detailed information on the many creeks that run through Goleta, identifies impairments to these creeks, and outlines programs and specific future actions to address identified impairments. It also outlines best practices to provide habitat for fish and wildlife, accommodate wildlife movement corridors, convey stormwater runoff and floodwaters, and furnish open space and passive recreational areas for City residents.  Bicycle and Pedestrian Master Plan (BPMP): Provides plan to expand and improve the pedestrian and bicycle network in the City of Goleta making it easier to walk and bike around town. The BPMP also promotes public health by encouraging people to walk and bike, reduces automobile usage and fuel consumption, and promotes transportation equity.
 Lake Los Carneros Master Plan (scheduled for an update): A comprehensive management plan s erving as the community’s guiding document to prioritize needed maintenance and improvemen ts to critical infrastructure, habitats, and recreation amenities in and around Lake Los Carneros.
 Ellwood Mesa/Sperling Preserve Open Space Monarch Butterfly Habitat Management Plan: Outlines the programmatic approach and methods for the City to manage and improve the Ellwood Mesa eucalyptus forest for the benefit of the overwintering behavior of the monarch butterfly, other wildlife, and the public’s use and enjoyment.
 Parks, Facilities and Playgrounds Master Plan : Creates a roadmap for upgrades, expansions and potential additions to the City parks system to meet current and future community needs for parks, open space, and urban respite areas that contribute to the public's health.
 Recreation Needs Assessment: Included an examination of the characteristics that define the community and an inventory of the existing recreational opportunities and resources available and set forth a guide and implementation tool for the management and development of recreational facilities and programs.  Strategic Energy and Climate Action Plan: Identifies how it will reach the renewable energy goals to move the city’s municipal facilities and community-wide electricity supply to 100% renewable power by 2030 and hav e at least 50 percent of electricity use by municipal facili ties come from renewable sources by 2025 , including options, methods, financial resources needed, and an associated timeline.
 Goleta Community Center Strategic Plan (under development): This project will develop a vision, mission, values, and strategic goa ls and objectives to guide the future use of the Goleta Community Center for the benefit of Old Town and the Goleta community at large.
 Economic Development Strategic Plan (under development): This will include the critical focuses of economic and workforce development, local business economy support, and tourism/visitor services. The Economic Development Strategic Plan and the objectives and initiatives that may come from this have been identified as a top priority of the business community, as represented through comments from the Santa Barbara South Coast Chamber of Commerce.
 Library Strategic Plan (planned): This will set forth a plan to meet the challenges facing library services and ensure that the Goleta Valley Library remains a vibrant and vital resource for the community.
5 390
Meeting Date: June 14, 2022

Page 6 of 7 ends

As mentioned above, the goals and objectives in these plans are important to the community, but the City has limited ability to address them. Instead, progress is made toward these priorities as our limited funding and staffing allow.

In polling and surveys, residents identified many of these areas of focus, particularly homelessness, creeks and watersheds, as important issues. Moving forward, Council could include a regular additional allocation in the Priority Spe nding Plan to make progress in addressing implementing these plans. Provided as Attachment 2 are the recent survey results (responses as of April 30, 2022) provided by over 600 people that took the survey and rated a list of priorities by level of importance.

5. Other Unfunded Costs
Over the past several years, the City Council has expressed interest in dedicating additional funds to the following areas:
 Parks and Open Space Maintenance : Since the City incorporated and took over Goleta, residents have expressed approval for the enhanced condition of our parks and open spaces, and Public Works is working on a comprehensive plan for maintaining these areas even more actively, but funding does limit what we can do.
 Childcare Programs: In April 2022, City Coun cil received a report about a study, funded jointly by the cities of Goleta and Santa Barbara, examining the significant challenges local families face in finding and affording childcare in our community.

The findings recommended the establishment of a stakeholder group and creation of a local childcare collaborative action plan to take concrete actions to address identified needs within the childcare sector. Childcare has been identified as a top priority of the business community, as represented through comments from the Santa Barbara South Coast Chamber of Commerce. There are currently no identified funds to assist with this effort.
 Affordable Housing Program : Housing in Goleta suffers from the same level of unaffordability as other local South Coast communities. A key City goal is the help address the City’s share of regional housing needs and make affordable housing available for individuals and families of all social and economic segments of the community, including those from low- and very low-income households.  Old Town Visioning Process, Old Town Improvements and CIP : The Old Town area is recognized as the historic center of town. Strategic efforts to restore this area include enhancing the physical and economic environment, improving the bicycle and pedestrian experience, managing traffic, and minimizing impacts on residential areas, while preserving the unique character of the area. As the City matures, there is a growing desire to establish a stronger identity for the community and create a greater sense of place. Old Town enhancements also have been identified as a top priority of the business community.  Enhanced Police Services: Community public safety has been a constant priority of the City Council. Cost increases from the County of Santa Barbara are affecting the affordability of Police services. Councilmembers have also indicated interest in exploring an increase in service levels to ensure that they remain appropriate for our growing community.
6 391
Meeting Date: June 14, 2022

Page 7 of 7 ends

Moving forward, Council could include a regular additional allocation in the Priority Spending Plan to address these other unfunded costs.

FISCAL IMPACTS:

As indicated above, the exercise in this workshop is not designed to commit the Council to an economic course of action, but to spur a public discussion about priorities for the use of the potential $10.6 Million annual increase in revenues that a 1% sales tax would bring, from among those important community needs that cannot be addressed with the City’s current revenues. As such, there is no financial impact associated with this discussion.

Reviewed By: Legal Review By: Approved By:

___________________ ___________________ _________________ Kristine Schmidt Megan Garibaldi Michelle Greene
Assistant City Manager City Attorney City Manager

ATTACHMENTS:

1. Capital Improvement Program Budget and Unfunded Amounts

2. Goleta‘s Next 20 Survey Results

3. Preliminary Local Revenue Measure Results – June 2022

4. Priority Spending Plan PowerPoint Presentation

7 392
ATTACHMENT 1:

Capital Improvement Program Budget and Unfunded Amounts

8 393
Public Works ‐ Current Annual Work Program Total Project Costs Current Unfunded   TBD 9002‐Ekwill Street & Fowler Road Extensions Project 33,515,381$                ‐$ ‐$ 9006‐San Jose Creek Bike Path ‐ Southern Extent 27,902,828$                3,705,000$                  ‐$ 9007‐San Jose Creek Bike Path  ‐ Middle Extent 2,867,664$                  ‐$ ‐$ 9027‐Goleta US 101 Overcrossing 48,594,613$                38,000,000$                ‐$ 9033‐Hollister Avenue Bridge Replacement 24,037,898$                ‐$ ‐$ 9053‐Ca
thedral Oaks Crib Wall Interim Repair Project 7,607,178$                  ‐$ ‐$ 9056‐LED Street Lighting  Project 1,193,589$                  ‐$ ‐$ 9062‐Storke Road/Hollister Avenue Transit, Bike/Ped, and Median Improvements 852,245$ ‐$ ‐$ 9067‐Goleta Community Center Upgrade 12,857,282$                2,300,000$                  ‐$ 9083‐Traffic Signal Upgrades 3,223,251$                  ‐$ ‐$ 9085‐Goleta Storm Drai n Master Plan 300,000$ ‐$ ‐$
9087‐Crosswalk Pedestrian Hybrid Beacon (PHB) on Calle Real near Encina Road 367,500$ ‐$ ‐$ 9088‐Rectangular Rapid Flashing Beacon (RRFB) Improvements at School Crosswalks 765,400$ ‐$ ‐$ 9089‐Goleta Traffic Safety Study (GTSS) 353,699$ ‐$ ‐$
9099‐Crosswalk at Calle Real/Fairview Center ‐ Pedestrian Hybrid Beacon ( PHB) 482,120$ ‐$ ‐$ 9110‐Hollister Class 1 Bike Path Lighting 688,725$ ‐$ ‐$ 9112‐Ellwood Mesa/Sperling Preserve Open Space Plan 3,900,000$                  ‐$ ‐$ 9114‐Hollister Avenue Old Town Interim Striping Project 1,450,028$                  ‐$ ‐$ 9115‐Public Works Corporation Yard Repairs 500,000$ ‐$ ‐$ 9117‐San Jose Creek Channel Fish‐Passage Mod ification Project 1,315,000$                  ‐$ ‐$ 9118‐Ellwood Coastal Trails and Habitat Restoration (Proposed FY 22/23) 2,475,000$                  ‐$ 2,400,000$ 9119‐Ellwood Beach Drive Drainage (Proposed FY 22/23) 253,000$ ‐$ ‐$ 9120‐Evergreen Park Drainage Repair (Proposed FY 22/23) 300,000$ ‐$ ‐$ 9121‐Goleta Community Center ADA Improvements (Proposed FY 22/23) 3,210,371$                  ‐$ ‐$ 9122‐City‐Wide Open Spa
ce Management & Maintenance (Proposed FY 22/23) 300,000$ ‐$ ‐$ 9123‐Lake Los Carneros Master Plan (Proposed FY 22/23) 750,000$ ‐$ ‐$ 9124‐Fairview & Stow Canyon Traffic Signal (Proposed FY 22/23) 2,200,000$                  2,000,000$                  ‐$ 9125‐Rectangular Rapid Flashing Beacons (RRFBs) Calle Real @ Jenna (Proposed FY 22/23) 350,000$ ‐$ ‐$ TBD ‐ Lak
e Los Carneros Pedestrian Bridge TBD TBD TBD
Public Works ‐ Current Annual Work Program ‐ Total 182,612,772$             46,005,000$                2,400,000$ Summary of CIP Projects by Annual Work Program (as of 6/9/2022) The following is a summary of the 5‐Year CIP Project Budget that first lists the projects identified in the current Annual Work Program and then followed by future projects or completed projects that have closeout items. The cost estimates are based on the data in the revised 5‐Year CIP that will be proposed to Council for adopt ion on June 21, 2022.

Attachment 1
9 394
Summary of CIP Projects by Annual Work Program (as of 6/9/2022) Neighborhood Services ‐ Current Annual Work Program Total Project Costs Current Unfunded   TBD 9025‐Fire Station No. 10 21,608,686$                13,447,939$                ‐$ 9063‐Evergreen Park Improvements 3,220,000$                  1,000,000$                  ‐$ 9071‐Improvements to Athletic Field at GCC 601,109$                     ‐$                              ‐$ 9074‐Stow Grove Multi‐Purpose Field 5,950,000$                  3,963,648$                  ‐$ 9079‐Goleta Train Depot and S. La Patera Improvements 19,485,227$                ‐$                              ‐$ 9084‐Com
munity Garden 1,645,095$                  ‐$                              ‐$ 9093‐San Miguel Park Improvements 245,000$                     ‐$                              ‐$ 9094‐Santa Barbara Shores Park Improvements 180,000$                     ‐$                              ‐$ 9108‐Winchester II Park 310,000$                     ‐$                              ‐$ 9111‐Jonny D. Wallis Neighborhood Park Phase 2 ‐ Splash Pad 1,807,322$                  ‐$                              ‐$ 9113‐Mathilda Park Improvements 524,252$                     ‐$                              ‐$ 9116‐Pickleb
all Courts 100,000$                     ‐$                              ‐$ Neighborhood Services ‐ Current Annual Work Program Total 55,676,691$                18,411,587$                ‐$ Public Works ‐ Not in Annual Work Program Total Project Costs Current Unfunded   TBD 9001‐Hollister Avenue Complete Streets Corridor Plan 8,195,464$                  6,500,000$                  ‐$ 9042‐Storke Road Widening, Phelps Road to City Limits 4,061,998$                  ‐$                              ‐$ 9044‐Hollister Widening, West of Storke Road 3,087,397$                  ‐$                              ‐$ 9061‐Cathedral Oaks Class I Multi‐Use Path 1,360$                          ‐$                              ‐$ 9064‐Reclaimed Water Service to Evergreen Par k 840,000$                     310,000$                     ‐$ 9065‐Reclaimed Water Service to Bella Vista Park 448,000$                     230,000$                     ‐$ 9069‐Miscellaneous Facilities Improvements 250,211$                     ‐$                              ‐$ 9078‐Rancho La Patera Improvements 4,455,000$                  3,660,000$                  ‐$ 9081‐Covington Drainage System Improvements 3,719,854$                  3,700,000$                  ‐$ 9086‐Vision Zero Plan 310,000$                     300,000$                     ‐$ 9096‐Orange Avenue Par
king Lot 785,000$                     400,000$                     ‐$ 9097‐Fairview Corridor Study (Fowler Road to Calle Real) 640,100$                     500,000$                     ‐$ 9100‐Hollister Avenue/Fairview Avenue Roundabout (Intersection Improvements) 9,020,000$                  8,500,000$                  ‐$ 9102‐Storke Road Corridor Study 338,775$                     200,000$                     ‐$ 9103‐Citywide School Zones Signage & Striping Evaluation 319,950$                     300,000$                     ‐$ 9104‐Citywide Evaluatio
n of Existing Traffic Signals 318,800$                     250,000$                     ‐$ 9105‐Ellwood Beach Drive Drainage Infrastructure Replacement 300,000$                     300,000$                     ‐$ 9106‐Phelps Ditch Flood Control Channel Trash Control Structure 650,000$                     600,000$                     ‐$ 9107‐Old Town South Fairview Avenue, High Flow Trash Capture Devices 350,000$                     ‐$                              ‐$ 9109‐Ward Drive Sidewalk Infill 675,000$                     675,000$                     ‐$ TBD‐z10‐Fa
irview Avenue and Stow Canyon Road Intersection Improvements (Not established in Incode until Year of A 1,500,000$                  ‐ $                              ‐ $ Public Works ‐ Not in Annual Work Program ‐ Total 40,266,910$                $              26,425,000   $                                ‐ 10 395
Summary of CIP Projects by Annual Work Program (as of 6/9/2022) Neighborhood Services ‐ Not in Annual Work Program Total Project Costs Current Unfunded   TBD 9066‐Miscellaneous Park Improvements 734,150$                     ‐$                              ‐$ 9075‐Evergreen Park Multi‐Purpose Field ‐$                              ‐$                              ‐$ 9076‐Public Swimming Pool 4,013,697$                  4,013,697$                  ‐$ 9077‐Recreation Center/Gymnasium 3,830,000$                  3,830,000$                  ‐$ Neighborhood Services ‐ Not in Annual Work Program ‐ Total 8,577,847$                  7,843,697$                  ‐$ General Services ‐ Not in Annual Work Progr am Total Project Costs Current Unfunded   TBD 9101‐City Hall Purchase & Improvements (Elevator) 12,142,919$                ‐$                              ‐$ General Services ‐ Not in Annual Work Program ‐ Total 12,142,919$                ‐$                              ‐$ Completed Projects ‐ Pending Closeout Items Total Project Costs Current Unfunded   TBD 9009‐San Jose Creek Improvements and Fish Passage 32,081,466$                ‐$                              ‐$ 9031‐Old Town Sidewalk Improvement Project 5,416,697$                  ‐$                              ‐$ 9058‐Rectangular Rapid Flashing Beacons (RRFB)  at Chapel / Pedestrian Hybrid Beacon (PHB) at Kingston 739,238$                     ‐$                              ‐$ 9070‐Fairview Avenue/US 101 Intersection Sidewalk Infill 115,150$                     ‐$                              ‐$ Compl
eted Projects Total 38,352,551$                ‐$                              ‐$ Total  ‐ Current Annual Work Program 238,289,463$             64,416,587$                2,400,000$ Total ‐ Not In Annual Work Program 60,987,675$                34,268,697$                ‐$ GRAND TOTAL 337,629,689$             98,685,284$                2,400,000$ 11 396
ATTACHMENT 2:

Goleta’s Next 20 Year Survey Results

12 397
Attachment 2

Goleta’s Next 20 Survey Results
Below is a list of priorities that will require additional resources. We recently asked Goleta residents to rate these priorities in level of importance. Thank you to the over 600 people that took the survey (responses as of April 30, 2022). Here is what you told us (importance of community services - high or medium priority):

List of Priorities Percent
Keeping public areas safe and clean 97%
Paving streets, removing potholes, and improving traffic safety 95% Protecting Goleta’s long-term financial stability 94%
Supporting public safety and maintaining rapid 911 response 93% Maintaining open spaces and natural areas 93%
Preparing for wildfires, floods, natural disasters, and public health emergencies
93%
Protecting local creeks and coastal waters from pollution 92% Conserving water by increasing use of recycled water to irrigate parks and fields
92%
Preventing brush fires caused by illegal encampments 91% Maintaining services for low-income senior citizens and other vulnerable residents
85%
Addressing homelessness through our Homelessness Strategic Plan 84% Helping local businesses rebound and retain the workforce to fill critical jobs
79%
Improving access to affordable housing for middle- and working-class families
78%
Supporting and expanding afterschool programs and affordable early childhood/childcare programs
73%

Source: https://www.cityofgoleta.org/projects-programs/studies-and-other- projects/goleta-s-next-20-years
13 398
ATTACHMENT 3:

Preliminary Local Revenue Measure Results – June 2022

14 399
CaliforniaCityFinance.Com
Local Revenue Measure Results
June 2022

There were 99 local measures on the June 7,
2022 election in California. Among these were
67 measures affecting local taxes, fees or
charges. Because of the large volume of vote-
by-mail, provisional and other ballots still to
tabulated by county elections officials, final
results will not be known for several weeks.

Among the 67 measures were 29 school
measures including 21 school bond measures
seeking a total of $1.775 billion in school
construction bond financing. There were 38
city, county and special district fiscal measures
including 11 majority vote measures and 27
special taxes and bond measures requiring
two-thirds voter approval. Among these were
10 add-on sales tax measures and 16 parcel
taxes.

This is substantially fewer local measures,
especially school measures, than ever before
in a spring presidential or gubernatorial
primary election.

Preliminary Election Night
Results
Based on election night tallies, 47 of the 67 tax
or bond measures are passing, about 70
percent. Although the number passing is lower
than primary elections over the last 20 years,
the percentage passing is comparable with the
exception of the record setting March 2020
election.
2217 Isle Royale Lane • Davis, CA • 95616-6616
Phone: 530.758.3952 • Fax: 530.758.3952

Sales Tax
Special Init 2
Sales Tax 4
Hotel
Occup Tax 4
Disposable
Cup Tax 1
G.O.

Bond 3
Cannabis Tax
2/3 1
Vehicle
Registration Tax 3
SalesTax
2/3 4 Parcel T ax
16 School
Parcel
Ta x 7
School
Bond 21
School Parcel
Tax Init 1
Proposed Local Revenue Measures
June 2022
55%
Vote
2/3
Vote
Majority
Vote
© 2022 Michael Coleman
School Initiative
Parcel Tax 1
Special District
Initiative Special Tax 1
County Initiative
Special Tax 1
County General
Tax 4
City General
Tax 5
City Special
Tax 7
City G.O.

Bond 2 County
Special
Tax 6
Special District
G.O.Bond 1
Special
District
ParcelTax
11 School
Parcel Tax
7 School Bond
55%
21 55%
Vote
2/3
Vote
Majority
Vote
Proposed Local Revenue Measures
June 2022
© 2022 Michael Coleman
June 8, 2022 Preliminary

Schools
Special Districts
Counties
Cities
Schools
Cities, counties,
special districts
15 400
Local Revenue Measure Results June 2022 – 2 – PRELIMI NARY June 8, 2022

CaliforniaCityFinance.com

Total Pass Passing%
City General Tax (Majority Vote) 5 3 60%
County General Tax (Majority Vote) 4 4 100%
County Init. Special Tax -Majority Vote* 1 0 0%
SpecDistrict Init. Tax -Majority Vote* 1 1 100%
City SpecialTax or G.O.bond (2/3 Vote) 9 6 67%
County Spec.Tax, G.O.bond (2/3 Vote) 6 4 67%
SpecDistrict Tax, G.O.bond (2/3 Vote) 12 7 58%
School ParcelTax (2/3 vote) 7 7 100%
School Init. Parcel Tax -Majority Vote 1 0 0%
School Bond 55% vote 21 15 71%
Total 67 47 70%
The City/County of San Francisco is counted as a city
Local Revenue Measures June 2022
Local Revenue Measures in California
City General Tax (majority vote) 11/14 78.6% 12/14 85.7% 10/11 90.9% 8/8 100.0% 13/13 100.0% 17/18 94.4% 23/34 67.6% 3/5 60.0% County General Tax (majority v ote) 1/1 100.0% 2/2 100.0% 4/7 57.1% /0 /2 0.0% 7/10 70.0% 3/9 33.3% 4/4 100.0% Special Dist. Majority Fee (majority v ote) / 1/1 100.0% // 1 /1 100.0% / / City Initiative Special Tax (majority vote) / / / / 1/1 100.0% / / County Initiative Special Tax (majority vote) / / / / / / 0/1 0.0% Special District Initiativ e Special Tax (majority v ote) / / / / / / 1/1 100.0% City SpecialTax orG.O.bond (2/3 vote) 2/5 40.0% 5/9 55.6% 2/8 25.0% 8/11 72.7% 7/10 70.0% 6/9 66.7% 8/16 50.0% 6/9 66.7% County Special Tax (2/3 vote) 1/2 50.0% 1/1 100.0% 3/3 100.0% 2/5 40.0% 1/5 20.0% 0/2 0.0% 0/4 0.0% 4/6 66.7% Special District (2/3 v ote) 5/10 50.0% 7/11 63.6% 4/10 40.0% 9/12 75.0% 2/6 33.3% 9/18 50.0% 3/26 11.5% 7/12 58.3% School Parcel Tax (2/3 vote) 6/13 46.2% 16/22 72.7% 9/13 69.2% 5/5 100.0% 7/7 100.0% 10/11 90.9% 14/28 50.0% 7/7 100.0% School Initiative ParcelTax (majority vote) / / / / 1/1 100.0% / 0/1 0.0% School Bond 2/3 vote 1/1 100.0% // 1 /1 100.0% 1/1 100.0% 0/2 0.0% 1/2 50.0% / School Bond 55% vote 25/32 78.1% 15/20 75.0% 25/34 73.5% 32/43 74.4% 41/45 91.1% 33/38 86.8% 43/119 36.1% 15/21 71.4% Total 52/78 66.7% 58/79 73.4% 58/87 66.7% 65/85 76.5% 72/89 80.9% 85/111 76.6% 95/238 39.9% 47/67 70.1% June 2022June2008 June2010 June2012 June2014 June2016 June 2018 March 2020 © 2022 Michael Coleman
© 2022 Michael Coleman
52 58 58 65 72 85 95 47
26 21 29 20 17
26 143
20 0
50 100
150
200
250
June2008 June2010 June2012 June2014 June2016 June2018 Mar2020 June2022 Pass Fail
40%
70%
California Local Tax and Bond Measures - Primary Elections 67% 73% 67% 77% 81% 77%
16 401
Local Revenue Measure Results June 2022 – 3 – PRELIMI NARY June 8, 2022

CaliforniaCityFinance.com

School Measures: Bonds and Parcel Taxes
With a few measures too close to call, the number of passing school bond measures appears to be a bit lower than in prior elections. School bonds are used for capital facilities and involve a borrowing that is paid back over time with an increase in the ad valorem property tax rate.

Parcel taxes are non ad valorem (rate per parcel) taxes. Proceeds from parcel taxes may be used to pay for operations. All of the school parcel taxes passed, except, notably, the one that was qualified by initiative and needed just majority voter approval.

School Parcel Taxes 
Parcel taxes are non ad-valorem taxes on property (rate per parcel). Proceeds from parcel taxes may be used to pay for operations.

In this election, there were seven measures that were extensions of previously approved taxes. All were placed on the ballot by their school district boards and required two-thirds voter approval. All seven passed.

The Manhattan Beach Unified School District parcel tax measure was placed on the ballot via citizen initiative and therefore, under recent court rulings, required only majority approval for passage. Unlike the other school parcel tax measures in this election, this was a new tax. The measure was defeated. 100% (7/7)
71% (15/21)
0% (0/1)
0% 20% 40% 60% 80% 100%
2/3 Vote
Parcel Tax*
55% Vote
Bond
Initiative
Parcel Tax
(Majority
Vote)
Percent Passing
School Tax & Bond Measures June 2022
Since 2001 84%
Since 2001 66%
17 402
Local Revenue Measure Results June 2022 – 4 – PRELIMI NARY June 8, 2022

CaliforniaCityFinance.com

School Bonds 
There were 21 local school bonds on the ballot this election, each requiring 55 percent approval. On election night, 15 are passing.

School Parcel Taxes (2/3 voter approval)
Agency Name County Rate Sunset YES% NO%
Kenwood SD Sonom a Measure A $52/yr ex tend 5yrs 78.5% 21.5% PASS Larkspur-Corte Madera SD Marin Measure E $910/yr extend 10yrs 75.7% 24.3% PASS Milpitas USD Santa Clara Measure E $84/yr ex tend 8yrs 74.7% 25.3% PASS Belm ont-Redwood Shores SD San Mateo Measure C $292/yr ex tend 10yrs 72.7% 27.3% PASS Alum Rock SD Santa Clara Measure I $214/yr ex tend 7yrs 70.8% 29.2% PASS Brisbane SD San Mateo Measure G $131/yr ex tend 6yrs 69.6% 30.4% PASS Mount Pleasant SD Santa Clara Measure H $84/yr ex tend 8yrs 67.5% 32.5% PASS School Parcel Tax - Majority Vote via Initiative
Manhattan Beach USD Los Angeles Measure A $1095/yr increase 12yrs 31. 2% 68.8% FAIL School Bond Measures - 55% Approval
School District County Meas ure Amount YES% NO%
Westside Elem entary School District Fresno Measure A 4,500,000 88.2% 11.8% PASS San Lucas Union School District Monterey Measure C 3,600,000 73.7% 26.3% PASS Ravenswood City SD San Mateo Measure I 110,000,000 68.1% 31.9% PASS Westm orland Union Elementary SD Im perial Measure w 3,750,000 67.3% 32.7% PASS Westm orland Union Elementary SD Im perial Measure z 3,750,000 66.7% 33.3% PASS Mill Valley SD Marin Measure G 194,000,000 66.1% 33.9% PASS San Rafael City HSD Marin Measure B 216,000,000 65.1% 34.9% PASS San Rafael City ESD Marin Measure C 152,000,000 64.3% 35.8% PASS Muroc Joint USD Kern / San Bernardino Measure B 21,000,000 62.8% 37.2% PASS Anderson V alley USD Mendocino Measure M 13,000,000 62.5% 37.5% PASS Jefferson ESD San Mateo Measure J 45,000,000 61.4% 38.6% PASS Little Lake City SD Los Angeles Meas ure LL 36,000,000 60.5% 39.5% PASS El Centro Elementary SD Imperial Measure y 37,800,000 60.4% 39.6% PASS Hillsborough City SD San Mateo Measure H 140,000,000 59.5% 40.5% PASS Chowchilla UHSD Madera Measure S 25,100,000 58.1% 41.9% PASS Frem ont Union HSD Santa Clara Measure G 275,000,000 54.4% 45.6% FAIL Alameda USD Alameda Measure B 298,000,000 53.9% 46.1% FAIL Sierra Sands USD Kern / San Bernardino Measure C 52,800,000 53.7% 46.3% FAIL Millbrae ESD San Mateo Measure E 90,000,000 50.8% 49.2% FAIL Imperial Unified SD Imperial Measure A 50,000,000 50.8% 49.2% FAIL Merced River Union Elementary SD Merced Measure T 3,500,000 23.5% 76.5% FAIL 18 403
Local Revenue Measure Results June 2022 – 5 – PRELIMI NARY June 8, 2022

CaliforniaCityFinance.com
City, County and Special District Measures
While there were fewer measures on the ballot than in prior elections, the passage rate of local non- school majority vote tax measures was consistent or even slightly better than prior elections.

City, County, Special District Tax & Bond Measures June 2022 63% (17/27)
78% (7/9)
50% 1/2
0% 20% 40% 60% 80% 100%
Special Tax 2/3
Voter Measures
Initiative Special
Tax (Majority
Vote)
General Tax
Majority Vote
Measures*
Percent Passing
Since 2001 76%
Since 2001 49%
0 1
1 1
2 3
3 3
11 1
1 2
1 1
1 1
5 Cannabis Tax Special 2/3
Disposable Cup Tax
Sales Tax - Init Special
G.O. Bond
Vehicle Registr Tax 2/3
Hotel Occup Tax
Sales Tax Special 2/3
Sales Tax
Parcel Tax 2/3
Passing
Failing
City, County, Special District Tax & Bond Measures June 2022 19 404
Local Revenue Measure Results June 2022 – 6 – PRELIMI NARY June 8, 2022

CaliforniaCityFinance.com
Parcel Taxes and Special Taxes (non-school) 
There were sixteen non-school parcel taxes all placed on the ballot by city councils or special district governing boards, requiring two-thirds voter approval.

Local Add-On Sales Taxes (Transaction and Use Taxes) 
Voters in four cities considered general purpose majority vote add-on sales tax rates ranging from 1/4 percent to one percent. Three passed. Avalon had both a sales tax and a hotel tax on the same election and both failed.

There were also four special add-on sales tax measures for specific purposes.

City, County and Special District Parcel Taxes (2/3 vote) Agency Name County Amount YES% NO%
Fallen Leaf Lake Community Service District El Dorado Measure A $6 60+/yr 87.5% 12.5% PASS ex tend Ross Marin Measure I $94.5+/yr 87.3% 12.7% PASS ex tend Firehouse Community Park Agency Marin Measure M $75/yr 85.3% 14.7% PASS increase Sleepy Hollow Fire Protection District Marin Measure L $94.5+/yr 84.4% 15.7% PASS ex tend Kentfield Fire Protection District Marin Measure K $94.5+/yr 83.5% 16.5% PASS ex tend San Anselmo Marin Measure J $94.5+/yr 80.7% 19.3% PASS ex tend Oakland Alameda Measure C $114.50/yr 80.4% 19.6% PASS ex tend L arkspur Marin Measure H $94.5+/yr 79.9% 20.1% PASS ex tend South County Am bulance Zone CSA No. 21 Tuolumne Measure W $90/yr 78.6% 21.4% PASS ex tend Sundance Trail Zone of Benefit El Dorado Measure C $600+/yr 75.6% 24.4% PASS increase River Delta Fire District Sacramento Measure H $90/yr 71.0% 29.0% PASS increase Martinez Contra Costa Measure F $79/yr 65.9% 34.1% FAIL increase Ex eter Public Cemetery Tulare Measure U $35/yr 61.1% 38.9% FAIL increase Oceano Community Services District San Luis Obispo Measure A $180+ /yr 60.9% 39.1% FAIL increase Knolls Property Owners Com munity Service DEl Dorado Measure B $300+/yr 57.9% 42.1% FAIL increase Cascade Drainage Zone of Benefit El Dorado Measure E $350/yr 0.0% 100.0% FAIL increase Transactions and Use Tax (Add-on Sales Tax) - General Tax - Majority Approval City County Meas ure Rate YES% NO% incr/ext
Torrance Los Angeles Measure SST 1/2 cent 55.2% 44.9% PASS increase Susanvi l l e L assen Measure P 1 cent 54.5% 45.5% PASS increase Santa Cruz Santa Cruz Measure F 1/2 cent 50.2% 49.8% PASS increase Avalon Los Angeles Measure S 1/4 cent 34.8% 65.3% FAIL increase Transactions and Use Tax (Add-on Sales Tax) - Special Tax - Two-Thirds Approval Agency Name County Rate Purpose Sunset YES% NO%
County of Fresno Fresno Measure Z 1/10 cent zoo 15yrs 82.4% 17.6% PASS ex tend Truckee Nevada Measure U by 1/4 cent to
1/2 cent
open space
/ trails none 76.4% 23.6% PASS increase
County of Marin Marin Measure A 1/4 cent open space
/ trails 9yrs 74.8% 25.2% PASS ex tend
County of Napa Napa Measure L 1/4 cent fire 10yrs 58.4% 41.6% FAIL increase 20 405
Local Revenue Measure Results June 2022 – 7 – PRELIMI NARY June 8, 2022

CaliforniaCityFinance.com
Two add-on sales tax measures were placed on the ballot by citizens initiative. Under recent court rulings, the Proposition 218 state constitutional requirement for a two-thirds vote for a special tax does not apply to a measure placed on the ballot by initiative. Nevertheless, the sales tax for fire services in Kings County was soundly defeated and the hospital sales tax in Mariposa county achieved over well two-thirds approval.

Transient Occupancy Taxes 
There were four Transient Occupancy Tax (Hotel Tax) measures, a ll for general purposes requiring majority voter approval.

Vehicle Registration Taxes 
Three counties submitted measures to continue existing local vehicle registration taxes used for abandoned vehicle abatement. Since Proposition 26 of 2010, these are now legally considered taxes, not fees and require two-thirds voter approval.

General Obligation Bonds 
There were three non-school general obligation bonds. On election night, only the City of Saint Helena water bond appears to be passing.

Transactions and Use Tax (Add-on Sales Tax) - Initiative Special Tax - Majority Vote Agency Name County Rate Purpose Sunset YES% NO%
John C. Fremont Healthcare District Mariposa Measure N 1 cent hospi tal 40yrs 71.6% 28.4% PASS increase County of Kings Kings Measure F 1/2 cent fire none 37.6% 62.4% FAIL increase Transient Occupancy Tax Tax Measures: Majority Vote General Use Agency Name County Rate YES% NO%
County of Placer - North Tahoe TOT Area Placer Measure A by 2% to 10% 86.8% 13.3% PASS ex tend County of Santa Cruz Unincorporated Santa Cruz Measure B by 1% to 12% 68.6% 31.4% PASS increase County of Hum boldt Unincorporated Hum boldt Measure J by 2% to 12% 63.3% 36.7% PASS ex pand Avalon Los Angeles Meas ure TT by 1% to 13% 48.9% 51.1% FAIL increase Agency Name Meas ure Amount YES% NO% Pass/Faincr/ext
County of Hum boldt Hum boldt Measure K $1/veh 79.5% 20.5% PASS ex tend County of Contra Costa Contra Costa Measure G $1/veh 68.7% 31.3% PASS ex tend County of Sacramento Sacramento Measure C $1/veh 58.6% 41.4% FAIL ex tend Abandoned Vehicle Abatement Tax
(Fees prior to Prop26 of 2010) - 2/3 voter approval required City, County and Special District General Obligation Bond Measure s (2/3 vote ) Agency County Amount YES% NO%
Saint Helena Napa Measure H 19,150,000$ water 77.3% 22.7% PASS San Francisco San Francisco Propos ition A 400,000,000$ public transportation 63.3% 36.7% FAIL Antelope Valley Healthcare District Los Angeles Measure H 400,000,000$ hospital 56.5% 43.5% FAIL 21 406
Local Revenue Measure Results June 2022 – 8 – PRELIMI NARY June 8, 2022

CaliforniaCityFinance.com
Disposable Cup Tax (Business Operations Tax) 
Voters in the County of Santa Cruz approved a measure to adopt a 12.5 cent per cup charge on single use cups, the first of its kind. The County previously imposed a 25 cent per cup charge on single use cups sold in the unincorporated areas of the county. The charge, which is to go into effect on July 1, 2022 is collected and retained by sellers. The cities of Watsonville and Santa Cruz already impose single use cup charges.

The measure, which passed easily, adopts have of the charge as a tax, to be remitted by businesses to the county for general purposes including environmental cleanup. The remaining 12.5 cents per cup will continue to be retained by the sellers.

The ballot question reads: “ To reduce pollution, trash and plastics entering local waters and beaches; protect water quality, public health and marine life; address illegal dumping; help prevent wildfires; clean/maintain parks and public areas; and provide environmental education and other general services, shall 12.5 cents of Santa Cruz County’s existing single-use cup charge be collected as a tax until ended by voters, raising approximately $700,000 annually and requiring public spending reports?”

Cannabis – Local Excise Taxes 
After a flurry of cannabis taxation measures in recent election s, there was just one this time. Revenues collected from the Huntington Beach measure are earmarked “for the specific purposes of funding police, homeless prevention, behavioral health services, and intervention programs….” The measure is trailing narrowly on election eve, too close to call.

Single Use Cup Tax - Majority Vote General Use
Agency Name County Rate Sunset YES% NO%
County of Santa Cruz Unincorporated Santa Cruz Measure C 12.5cents /cup none 68.2% 31.8% PASS Cannabis Taxes - Two-Thirds Vote Special Purpose
Agency Name County Rate Sunset YES% NO%
Huntington Beach Orange Measure A 6% of gross receipts none 66.3% 33.7% FAIL 22 407
Local Revenue Measure Results June 2022 – 9 – PRELIMI NARY June 8, 2022

CaliforniaCityFinance.com

Other Municipal Measures of Note 

Voters in three cities and the County of Siskiyou considered making elected clerk or county auditor positions appointed to improve professionalism and reduce costs. The Carlsbad measure was just 8 voted behind on election night with hundreds of votes still to be tabulated.

Five term limits measures passed.

************
For more information: Michael Coleman 530-758-3952. [email protected]

Appointed City Clerk / City Treasurer / etc.

Agency Name County %YES% NO%
Imperial Imperial Measure v appoint clerk 53.3% 46.7% PASS Carlsbad San Diego Measure C appoint clerk 50.0% 50.0% FAIL South G ate Los Angeles Measure CC appoint clerk 45.9% 54.1% FAIL County of Siskiyou Siskiyou Measure P appoint county
auditor-controller 40.8% 59.2% FAIL
Term limits
Agency Name County %YES% NO%
Glendale USD Los Angeles Measure T 88.4% 11.6% PASS
Am erican Canyon Napa Measure I 82.0% 18.1% PASS
Beverly Hills Los Angeles Measure TL 80.9% 19.1% PASS
Lynwood Los Angeles Measure R 64.0% 36.0% PASS
Santa Clara Water District Santa Clara Measure A 53.5% 46.5% PASS 23 408
ATTACHMENT 4:

Priority Spending Plan PowerPoint Presentation

24 409
City of Goleta
City Council Workshop
June 14, 2022
Priority Spending
Plan Workshop
25 410
Goleta has weathered the pandemic and associated
economic challenges using a hiring freeze and
postponing capital maintenance and improvements.

However, even prior to the pandemic, the City did not
have sufficient funding to keep up with capital asset
depreciation and investments in infrastructure.

City revenues are sufficient to get by, but not enough
to achieve goals in the City Council’s Strategic Plan or address the backlog of critical deferred maintenance.

City revenues are also reduced because of the
Revenue Neutrality Agreement (RNA) between the
City and the County.
2 Does Goleta Need
Additional
Revenues?
Background
26 411
3 How Are Funds
Currently
Allocated?
General
Government
14%
General
Services
8%
Library
1%
Finance
4%
Planning & Env.

Review
10%Public Works
18%
Neighborhood
Services
5%
Public Safety
22%
Non-
Departmental
2%
CIP
16%
General Fund – FY 22/23 - $44.1 M
General Government
8%
General Services
4% Library Services
4%
Finance
2%
Planning &
Environmental Review
5%
Public Works
16%
Neighborhood
Services
4%
Police
Services
12%
Non-Departmental
3%
CIP
42%
All Funds – FY 22/23 - $81.25
• All funds includes Gas Tax, Measure A,
library and street lighting assessments,
DIFs,
state and federal grants and ARPA
• General Fund includes use of one-time
funds from fund balance for one-time
expenditures
27 412
4 Potential Revenue
Enhancements
The City Council has studied a range of options to
provide locally-controlled, ongoing revenue to meet the City’s growing needs and ensure financial stability:
• 1¢ Sales Tax generating approximately $10.6M/year;
• 6% Utility Users Tax generating approximately
$4M/year
• $100 per parcel tax generating approximately
$1M/year
• Business License Tax based on employees, square
footage or gross income generating
approximately
$2M/year depending on specifics
• Transient Occupancy Tax increase generating
approximately $3M/year
28 413
5 Rationale for a
Sales Tax
A sales tax stands out for several reasons

1. An estimated 44% of the sales tax increase would
be paid by visitors and other non-residents. It
would apply to everyone who purchases retail
goods within City limits.

2. Essential items are exempt from sales tax. This
means a sales tax would not raise the cost of food,
prescription medicine and certain medical devices,
gasoline, and sales of items paid for with food
stamps.

3. It is familiar to the public, and preferred to
alternative forms of revenue enhancement
29 414
6 Rationale for a
Sales Tax
A sales tax stands out for several reasons:
(continued):

4. Goleta currently is tied for the lowest sales tax rate among cities in Santa Barbara County.

5. Unlike other cities in the County and the state,
Goleta does not receive the full 1% of the baseline

7.75% sales tax that all CA cities collect. The
County receives 30% (over $ 3 million) of Goleta’s
1%.

6. Goleta would retain 100% of any new sales tax
approved by local voters.
30 415
Sales Tax Exemptions
Qualifying purchases made in the City of Goleta are subject to the tax. This includes items such as clothing, cars, household goods and alcohol. Pursuant to California Revenue and Taxation Code, food groceries, prescriptions, certain medical devices, and other “Necessities of Life” are exempt from sales taxes. 31 416
8 History of the
Sales Tax in
Goleta
$3.5M $3.6M $3.9M $4.M $4.1M $4.2M
$3.4M $3.3M
$3.9M $3.8M
$5.8M
$6.8M
$6.3M $6.2M $6.5M $6.4M
$7.M $6.7M
$7.6M
$8.1M
0% 4% 7% 5% 2% 1%
-19%
-1%
18%
-2%
50%
18%
-7% -2%
4% -1%
9%
-4%
13% 7%
-20%
0%
20%
40%
60%
80%
100%
120%
140%
$0M
$1M
$2M
$3M
$4M
$5M
$6M
$7M
$8M
$9M
Change from Prior Year
Sales Tax

MILLIONS
Sales Tax Revenues
Sales Tax Revenue Change from Prior Year
Great
Recession
COVID-19
Time Period Description
2002 - 2012 At start of City incorpor ation, the County received 50% of the City’s Sales Tax allocation, and then reduced to 30% starting in FY 12/13
4/1/2009 – 6/30/2011 The State of CA increased their sales tax rate to 7.75%, making Goleta’s overall sales tax rate temporarily at 8.75% during the Great Recession
7/1/2011 – 12/31/2012 Goleta’s overall sales tax rate back to 7.75% 1/11/2013 – 12/31/2016 Goleta’s overall sales tax rate temporarily increased to 8.00% due to the State of CA 1/1/2017 - Now Goleta’s overall sales rate went back to 7.75% Sales Tax History
32 417
9 Goleta’s Property
Tax and Sales Tax
are not fully
allocated to the
City
Lompoc
Buellton
Santa Maria
Santa Barbara
Guadalupe
Carpinteria
Solvang
Goleta

0.00%

2.00%

4.00%

6.00%

8.00%

10.00%

12.00%

14.00%

16.00%

18.00%

20.00%
City Property Tax %
Share of 1% Property Tax
By City
Average County
Share – All Cities Average City & County Share
from Goleta
 The City of Goleta receives the lowest property tax percentage among Santa Barbara County cities. Goleta shares 50% of its pro
perty tax allocation with the County, per the RNA.
 If the RNA did not exist, Goleta’s property tax allocation would be approximately 10% instead of 5%
Property Tax Allocations by City
33 418
10 Goleta’s Property
Tax and Sales Tax
are not fully
allocated to the
City
 The City of Goleta receives the lowest property tax percentage among Santa Barbara County cities. Goleta shares 50% of its pro
perty tax allocation with the County, per the RNA.
 If the RNA did not exist, Goleta’s property tax allocation would be approximately 10% instead of 5%
Where do Goleta’s Property Tax Go?
Dependent Districts, 1.62%
Independent Districts, 4.31%
Goleta, 5.10%
County, 11.10%
County Fire, 14.84%
Schools, 63.02%

0.00%

10.00%

20.00%

30.00%

40.00%

50.00%

60.00%

70.00%

80.00%

90.00%
100.00%
Property Tax Share
City of Goleta Property Tax Allocations
Schools
County Fire
County
Goleta
Independent Districts
Dependent Districts
34 419
11 Goleta’s Property
Tax and Sales Tax
are not fully
allocated to the
City
 Almost all Cities in California receive the base 1% allocation of the sales tax, except Goleta  Goleta receives the lowest sales tax allocation of the base 1%, due to the RNA. 30% goes to the County.

1.00%

2.25%

0.70%

1.25%

2.00%

1.00%

0.50%

2.313%

2.613%

2.313%

3.9375%

7.7500%

9.0000%

7.7500%

8.0000%

8.7500%

7.7500%

CITY OF BUELLTO N
CITY OF CARP IN T E R I A (1)

CITY OF GOLETA
CITY OF GUAD ALUP E (2)
CITY OF LOMP OC ( 3)
CITY OF SANTA BARBAR A (4)
CITY OF SANTA MARIA ( 5)

CITY OF SOLV ANG

SALES TAX RATE BY CITY AND ALLOCATION
City SBCAG County State of CA
(1)City of Carpinteria passed a 1.25% sales tax measure at the November 6, 2018 General Election. (2)City of Guadalupe passed a 0.25% sales tax measure at the November 4, 2014 General Election, along with two other tax measures. (3)City of Lompoc passed a 1% sales tax measure during the primary election March 3, 2020, with a sunset date of 15 years (4)City of Santa Barbara passed a 1.0% sales tax measure at the November 6, 2018 General Election. (5)City of Santa Maria first passed a 0.25% sales tax measure at the June 5, 2012 Primary Election with a sunset date of 9 years (2021).

City of Santa Maria then passed a sales tax renewal measure to increase the 0.25% rate to 1% with no sunset clause at the N ovember 6, 2018 General Election.

Sales Tax Allocations by City
35 420
12 Goleta’s Property
Tax and Sales Tax
are not fully
allocated to the
City
Other Cities Nearby with Additional Sales Tax
Ventura County:

Tax Area Rate Effective Date
Oxnard (City) 1.50% 4/1/2021
Oxnard (City) 0.50% 4/1/2009
Port
Hueneme (City) 1.00% 4/1/2019
Port Hueneme (City) 0.50% 4/1/2009
Santa Paula (City) 1.00% 4/1/2017
Ventura (City) 0.50% 4/1/2017
San Luis Obispo County:

Tax Area Rate
Effective Date
Arroyo Grande (City) 0.50% 4/1/2007
Atascadero (City) 1.00% 4/1/2
021
Atascadero (City) 0.50% 4/1/2015
Grover Beach (City) 1.50% 4/1/2021
Grover Beach (City) 0.50% 4/1/2007
Morro Bay (City) 1.50% 4/1/2021
Morro Bay (City) 0.50% 4/1/2007
Paso Robles (City) 1.00% 4/1/2021
Paso Robles (City) 0.50% 4/1/2013
Pismo Beach (City) 0.50% 10/1/2008
San Luis Obispo (City) 1.50% 4/1/2021
San Luis Obispo (City) 0.50% 4/1/2007
36 421
Preliminary – Local Add-On Sales Tax Measure – June 2022 Election 37 422
14 Consistent
Support for a
Sales Tax
Increase
Generation
Four separate public opinion surveys indicate support
for enhanced revenue generation through a one cent
increase in the City’s sales tax.
38 423
Public Opinion Polling Data and Budget Priorities
Helping prevent brush fires caused by illegal encampments, protecting creeks and coastal waters from pollution, and supporting public safety response are among the potential uses of the funds considered extremely/very important by seven in ten voters or more.

Ext./Very
Impt.
73%
71%
71%
71%
71%
70%
70%
70%
37%
36%
33%
32%
28%
34%
31%
30%
36%
35%
38%
38%
43%
36%
39%
40%
19%
20%
19%
23%
22%
23%
25%
22%
8%
9%
10%
7%
8%
7%
5%
8%
Helping prevent brush fires caused by illegal
encampments
Protecting creeks and coastal waters from pollution
Supporting public safety, and
911 response
Preventing pollution from entering local creeks and
coastal waters
Keeping public areas clean and safe
Protecting public health and safety
Increasing the use of recycled water to irrigate parks
and fields
^Repairing streets and potholes
Ext. Impt. Very Impt. Smwt. Impt. Not Too Impt./Don't Know (Ranked by Extremely/Very Important)
Q. I am now going to read you a list of possible uses for the funds that might be included in this local ballot measure. Regardless of how you feel about this measure, please tell me how important it is to you personally that each use of funds is included in the measure: extremely important, very important, somewhat important, or not too important. ^Not Part of Split Sample
39 424
Public Opinion Polling Data and Budget Priorities
(Ranked by Extremely/Very Important)
Ext./Very
Impt.
69%
67%
67%
67%
66%
66%
65%
64%
29%
32%
31%
23%
35%
27%
25%
37%
40%
35%
36%
44%
31%
39%
40%
26%
24%
23%
20%
28%
20%
23%
26%
25%
7%
11%
12%
14%
12%
10%
11%
Retaining and attracting local businesses and jobs
Maintaining open spaces and natural areas
Retaining local businesses and jobs
Keeping parks clean and safe
Maintaining open space
^Protecting Goleta’s long-term financial stability
Addressing homelessness
Ext. Impt. Very Impt. Smwt. Impt. Not Too Impt./Don't Know Q. I am now going to read you a list of possible uses for the funds that might be included in this local ballot measure. Regardless of how you feel about this measure, please tell me how important it is to you personally that each use of funds is included in the measure: extremely important, very important, somewhat important, or not too important. ^Not Part of Split Sample Continued
40 425
17 Community
Survey Results
(as of April 30, 2022)
Below is a list of priorities that will require additional resources. In April over 600 Goleta residents ranked the priorities by level of importance. Here are the community services that were ranked as high or medium priority:

Survey Results Are In!
Keeping public areas safe and clean 97%
Paving streets, removing potholes, and improving traffic safety 95% Protecting Goleta’s long-term financial stability 94%
Supporting public safety and maintaining rapid 911 response 93% Maintaining open spaces and natural areas 93%
Preparing for wildfires, floods, natural disasters, and public health emergencies 93% Protecting local creeks and coastal waters from pollution 92% Conserving water by increasing use of recycled water to irrigate parks and fields 92% Preventing brush fires caused by illegal encampments 91% Maintaining services for low-income senior citizens and other vulnerable residents 85% Addressing homelessness through our Homelessness Strategic Plan 84% Helping local businesses rebound and retain the workforce to fill critical jobs 79% Improving access to affordable housing for middle- and working-class families 78% Supporting and expanding afterschool programs and affordable early childhood/childcare programs 73%
41 426
18 What is
Unfunded?
• Capital Improvement Program (CIP) Projects
• Over $100 million
• Current City revenues are not sufficient to support debt service • Pavement Program Deficit
• Existing budget at $2.6 million, need additional ongoing of $3.4 million to maintain PCI avera
ge of 67
• Critical Maintenance Backlog
• Old buildings (Library, Community Center, Stow House and Historic Train Depot)
• Other facility impr
ovements, fixture and equipment replacements,
and establishment of replacement reserves
• Public street tr
ees, sidewalks, and parks and open space
• Important Community Master Plans
• Other Unfunded Costs
• Childcare programs, Affordable Housing Program, Old Town improvements, and Public Safety and Library
42 427
19 Some
Investments
Cannot Wait
• Address homelessness
• Repair streets, remove potholes
• Provide ways to expand childcare and help make it more affordable as well as to expand opportunities for
aft
erschool programs
• Prevent polluted stormwater runoff from entering local creeks and coastal wat
ers
• Restore local creeks and add more bicycle and pedestrian routes
• Increase affordable housing
• Prov
ide programs to assist local businesses and families
facing economic hardship
Why the need to add revenues?
43 428
20 We must avoid
falling behind
on our
investments
The City should not let its investment in
strategic planning go to waste
Existing Strategic Plans
• Creek and Watershed Management Plan
• Butterfly Habitat Management Plan
• Parks, Facilities and Playgrounds Master Plan
• Bicycle and Pedestrian Master Plan
• Homelessness Strategic Plan
• Strategic Energy and Climate Action Plan
• Pavement Condition Index Goal
Plans that are soon to be started or complet
ed
• Old Town Visioning Process
• Community Center Strategic Plan
• Economic Development Strategic Plan
• Child Care Master Plan
• Lake Los Carneros Master Plan Update
• Affordable Housing Plan
44 429
21 What if Goleta
does not
address its
deferred
maintenance?
Failing to address deferred maintenance and backlog of priorities will result in increasing costs and other issues, including safety hazards, health risks, compliance issues, costly emergency repairs, reduced equipment efficiency, shorter asset life cycles, poor quality facilities, and employee retention challenges.
99M 118M 134M 148M 161M 170M 179M 184M 190M 196M 202M
FY 21/22 FY 22/23 FY 23/24 FY 24/25 FY 25/26 FY 26/27 FY 27/28 FY 28/29 FY 29/30 FY 30/31 FY 31/32 Cost of Continued Deferred CIP (Unfunded Portion Only)
$10.3M annual average increase
9M 11M 12M 14M 15M 15M 19M 24M 29M
36M
45M
FY 21/22 FY 22/23 FY 23/24 FY 24/25 FY 25/26 FY 26/27 FY 27/28 FY 28/29 FY 29/30 FY 30/31 FY 31/32 Cost of Continued Deferred Maintenance
$5.8M annual increase
$1.3M annual average increase
Costs of Deferred Maintenance
45 430
22 What happens if
Goleta does not
have the
additional funding
for its pavement
program?
Pavement Program
• Goleta will struggle to keep up with the PCI average goal of 67 and roads will continue to deteriorate at a fa
ster pace
• At current funding levels, PCI levels will continue to drop and reach a PCI level of 50 by FY 30/31. Anything below 55 is considered to be in “poor” condition, and may result in in costly reconstruction instead of main
tenance
20/21 21/22 22/23 23/24 24/25 25/26 26/27 27/28 28/29 29/30 30/31 Increase to PCI Goals - ($5.8M) 62 67 67 67 67 67 67 67 67 67 67 Maintain 63 - ($4.7M) 62 63 63 63 63 63 63 63 63 63 63
Current Budget - ($2.5M) 62 62 61 60 58 57 56 54 53 51 50 Zero budget 62 61 58 56 54 51 48 46 43 40 37
30 35
40 45
50 55
60 65
70 PCI RANGE
PAVEMENT CONDITION INDEX - 10 YEAR PROJECTION
46 431
General Fund Impacts and Deferred Maintenance
$0
$10,000,000
$20,000,000
$30,000,000
$40,000,000
$50,000,000
$60,000,000
$70,000,000
$80,000,000
$90,000,000
$100,000,000
FY 21/22 FY 22/23 FY 23/24 FY 24/25 FY 25/26 FY 26/27 FY 27/28 FY 28/29 FY 29/30 FY 30/31 FY 31/32 General Fund Forecast: Revenues and Expenditures with Deferred Maintenance Surplus (Deficit) General Fund Revenues Total Expenditures Expenditures outpace Revenues
Ongoing Annual Deficit
-$50,000,000
-$45,000,000
-$40,000,000
-$35,000,000
-$30,000,000
-$25,000,000
-$20,000,000
-$15,000,000
-$10,000,000
-$5,000,000
$0
FY 21/22 FY 22/23 FY 23/24 FY 24/25 FY 25/26 FY 26/27 FY 27/28 FY 28/29 FY 29/30 FY 30/31 FY 31/32 Net Operating Revenue with Deferred Maintenance
Ongoing Annual Deficit
Average Years: 5 Years 10 Years
Average Annual Surplus (Deficit) $ (12,100,172) $ (20,736,093) Average Annual Deficit Increase
Per Year $ (1,295,627) $ (3,526,055)
Average Annual Deficit Growth
Rate 12.8% 18.7%
 Goleta cannot afford critical deferred maintenance or continue to keep putting off critical maintenance
without facing significant cost increases
 The City is at risk should another unanticipated emergency repair be needed, like the Cathedral Oaks
Cribwall Repair Project
 In an event of an emergency, the City will have to look at using the contingency reserve, possible lines
of credit and reducing
service levels permanently to afford debt service for an emergency repair
 The charts assumes the City’s current revenue stream and expenditures, with deferred mainte
nance programmed in
 A significant ongoing deficit exists and will further increase when maintenance items become major
structural repairs
or replacements which will experience significant cost
increases
47 432
24 Sample Sales
Tax Ballot
Language
• Ballot Language must be very general about what funds will be used for .
• Sample Ballot Language below:
• “To maint
ain City of Goleta services, to address public
health emergencies and natural disasters, support
public safety and 911 response, clean and maintain
public areas, retain local businesses and jobs, maintain open spaces, repair s
treets, address homelessness and
provide other general City services, shall a measure be adopted establishing a 1¢ sales tax providing
approximately $9,800,000 annually until ended by
voters, requiring annual independent audits with all
funds staying in Goleta?”
48 433
25 General
Purpose Tax
Constraints
General Purpose Tax Constraints
- As a general-purpose tax requiring majority voter
support (rather than a special tax requiring 2/3
voter support), the City cannot commit funds on
the ballot for any particular direction and must
maintain the availability of such funds for any
general purpose.
- However, the City Council can establish specific
priorities to guide the use of the new revenue
generated by a sales tax measure.
49 434
Spending Plan
26 The Council may wish to approve a
plan for how to allocate potential
new sales tax revenue to ensure that:
• Funds go to the highest priority
projects and purposes, and
• Instead of a backlog of unfunded
capital projects, strategic plans,
and degrading
roads, the
community will see progress and
accomplishments.

The plan can be revised each year or
two, as conditions warrant
50 435
Spending Plan
27 • Staff will walk Council through a
prioritization process with a
tracking spreadsheet
• Council can eng
age in a ranking
process to identify their key
priorities
• Community members are
encourag
ed to provide input on
spending priorities
• Subject to Council dire
ction,
priorities not listed can be
incorporated in the Spending
Plan
51 436
Spending Plan
28 See excel spreadsheet
52 437
ATTACHMENT 5:

Copy of June 14, 2022 Staff Report - Priority Spending Plan Workshop for Enhanced Sales Tax Revenues
438
Agenda Item A.1

WORKSHOP
Meeting Date: June 14, 2022

TO: Mayor and Councilmembers

FROM: Michelle Greene, City Manager

CONTACT: Luke Rioux, Finance Director

SUBJECT: Priority Spending Plan Workshop for Enhanced Sales Tax Revenues

RECOMMENDATIONS:

Provide input, feedback and policy direction related to a draft Priority Spending Plan for new revenue generated by a potential 1¢ Sales Tax.

BACKGROUND:

On June 7, 2022, the City Council provided direction to staff to move forward with an ordinance to place a 1% (1¢ per dollar) sales tax on the ballot for the November 2022 General Election.

1 439
Meeting Date: June 14, 2022

Page 2 of 7 ends

DISCUSSION:

1. Capital Improvement Program (CIP) Projects

Once the Comprehensiv e CIP Project List is established, priority projects are identified from the list each year, budgeted and included in the Five-Year CIP Plan (Five-Year CIP).

Projects included in the Five-Year CIP will be actively worked on over the next five years.

Page 3 of 7 ends

At the CIP Budget Workshop held on June 8, 2022, staff presented funding strategies to address only the active CIP projects listed in FY 22/23 Annual Work Program Projects.

Without the additional revenue source from the proposed sales tax, many of the projects included in the CIP cannot be completed.

2. Pavement Program Deficit

Underspending on maintenance of roadways increases safety co ncerns and, ultimately, costs will be significantly higher when the roadways eventually d o receive maintenance.

Due to deferred maintenance, t he most recent independent engineers report rated two - thirds of Goleta’s streets and roads as “fair,” “poor,” or “failed.”

3 441
Meeting Date: June 14, 2022

Page 4 of 7 ends

3. Critical Maintenance Backlog

4. Important Community Master Plans

Page 5 of 7 ends

Page 6 of 7 ends

Page 7 of 7 ends

Moving forward, Council could include a regular additional allocation in the Priority Spending Plan to address these other unfunded costs.

FISCAL IMPACTS:

Reviewed By: Legal Review By: Approved By:

___________________ ___________________ _________________ Kristine Schmidt Megan Garibaldi Michelle Greene
Assistant City Manager City Attorney City Manager

ATTACHMENTS:

1. Capital Improvement Program Budget and Unfunded Amounts

2. Goleta‘s Next 20 Survey Results

3. Preliminary Local Revenue Measure Results – June 2022

4. Priority Spending Plan PowerPoint Presentation

7 445
ATTACHMENT 1:

Capital Improvement Program Budget and Unfunded Amounts

8 446
Public Works ‐ Current Annual Work Program Total Project Costs Current Unfunded   TBD 9002‐Ekwill Street & Fowler Road Extensions Project 33,515,381$                ‐$ ‐$ 9006‐San Jose Creek Bike Path ‐ Southern Extent 27,902,828$                3,705,000$                  ‐$ 9007‐San Jose Creek Bike Path  ‐ Middle Extent 2,867,664$                  ‐$ ‐$ 9027‐Goleta US 101 Overcrossing 48,594,613$                38,000,000$                ‐$ 9033‐Hollister Avenue Bridge Replacement 24,037,898$                ‐$ ‐$ 9053‐Ca
thedral Oaks Crib Wall Interim Repair Project 7,607,178$                  ‐$ ‐$ 9056‐LED Street Lighting  Project 1,193,589$                  ‐$ ‐$ 9062‐Storke Road/Hollister Avenue Transit, Bike/Ped, and Median Improvements 852,245$ ‐$ ‐$ 9067‐Goleta Community Center Upgrade 12,857,282$                2,300,000$                  ‐$ 9083‐Traffic Signal Upgrades 3,223,251$                  ‐$ ‐$ 9085‐Goleta Storm Drai n Master Plan 300,000$ ‐$ ‐$
9087‐Crosswalk Pedestrian Hybrid Beacon (PHB) on Calle Real near Encina Road 367,500$ ‐$ ‐$ 9088‐Rectangular Rapid Flashing Beacon (RRFB) Improvements at School Crosswalks 765,400$ ‐$ ‐$ 9089‐Goleta Traffic Safety Study (GTSS) 353,699$ ‐$ ‐$
9099‐Crosswalk at Calle Real/Fairview Center ‐ Pedestrian Hybrid Beacon ( PHB) 482,120$ ‐$ ‐$ 9110‐Hollister Class 1 Bike Path Lighting 688,725$ ‐$ ‐$ 9112‐Ellwood Mesa/Sperling Preserve Open Space Plan 3,900,000$                  ‐$ ‐$ 9114‐Hollister Avenue Old Town Interim Striping Project 1,450,028$                  ‐$ ‐$ 9115‐Public Works Corporation Yard Repairs 500,000$ ‐$ ‐$ 9117‐San Jose Creek Channel Fish‐Passage Mod ification Project 1,315,000$                  ‐$ ‐$ 9118‐Ellwood Coastal Trails and Habitat Restoration (Proposed FY 22/23) 2,475,000$                  ‐$ 2,400,000$ 9119‐Ellwood Beach Drive Drainage (Proposed FY 22/23) 253,000$ ‐$ ‐$ 9120‐Evergreen Park Drainage Repair (Proposed FY 22/23) 300,000$ ‐$ ‐$ 9121‐Goleta Community Center ADA Improvements (Proposed FY 22/23) 3,210,371$                  ‐$ ‐$ 9122‐City‐Wide Open Spa
ce Management & Maintenance (Proposed FY 22/23) 300,000$ ‐$ ‐$ 9123‐Lake Los Carneros Master Plan (Proposed FY 22/23) 750,000$ ‐$ ‐$ 9124‐Fairview & Stow Canyon Traffic Signal (Proposed FY 22/23) 2,200,000$                  2,000,000$                  ‐$ 9125‐Rectangular Rapid Flashing Beacons (RRFBs) Calle Real @ Jenna (Proposed FY 22/23) 350,000$ ‐$ ‐$ TBD ‐ Lak
e Los Carneros Pedestrian Bridge TBD TBD TBD
Public Works ‐ Current Annual Work Program ‐ Total 182,612,772$             46,005,000$                2,400,000$ Summary of CIP Projects by Annual Work Program (as of 6/9/2022) The following is a summary of the 5‐Year CIP Project Budget that first lists the projects identified in the current Annual Work Program and then followed by future projects or completed projects that have closeout items. The cost estimates are based on the data in the revised 5‐Year CIP that will be proposed to Council for adopt ion on June 21, 2022.

Attachment 1
9 447
Summary of CIP Projects by Annual Work Program (as of 6/9/2022) Neighborhood Services ‐ Current Annual Work Program Total Project Costs Current Unfunded   TBD 9025‐Fire Station No. 10 21,608,686$                13,447,939$                ‐$ 9063‐Evergreen Park Improvements 3,220,000$                  1,000,000$                  ‐$ 9071‐Improvements to Athletic Field at GCC 601,109$                     ‐$                              ‐$ 9074‐Stow Grove Multi‐Purpose Field 5,950,000$                  3,963,648$                  ‐$ 9079‐Goleta Train Depot and S. La Patera Improvements 19,485,227$                ‐$                              ‐$ 9084‐Com
munity Garden 1,645,095$                  ‐$                              ‐$ 9093‐San Miguel Park Improvements 245,000$                     ‐$                              ‐$ 9094‐Santa Barbara Shores Park Improvements 180,000$                     ‐$                              ‐$ 9108‐Winchester II Park 310,000$                     ‐$                              ‐$ 9111‐Jonny D. Wallis Neighborhood Park Phase 2 ‐ Splash Pad 1,807,322$                  ‐$                              ‐$ 9113‐Mathilda Park Improvements 524,252$                     ‐$                              ‐$ 9116‐Pickleb
all Courts 100,000$                     ‐$                              ‐$ Neighborhood Services ‐ Current Annual Work Program Total 55,676,691$                18,411,587$                ‐$ Public Works ‐ Not in Annual Work Program Total Project Costs Current Unfunded   TBD 9001‐Hollister Avenue Complete Streets Corridor Plan 8,195,464$                  6,500,000$                  ‐$ 9042‐Storke Road Widening, Phelps Road to City Limits 4,061,998$                  ‐$                              ‐$ 9044‐Hollister Widening, West of Storke Road 3,087,397$                  ‐$                              ‐$ 9061‐Cathedral Oaks Class I Multi‐Use Path 1,360$                          ‐$                              ‐$ 9064‐Reclaimed Water Service to Evergreen Par k 840,000$                     310,000$                     ‐$ 9065‐Reclaimed Water Service to Bella Vista Park 448,000$                     230,000$                     ‐$ 9069‐Miscellaneous Facilities Improvements 250,211$                     ‐$                              ‐$ 9078‐Rancho La Patera Improvements 4,455,000$                  3,660,000$                  ‐$ 9081‐Covington Drainage System Improvements 3,719,854$                  3,700,000$                  ‐$ 9086‐Vision Zero Plan 310,000$                     300,000$                     ‐$ 9096‐Orange Avenue Par
king Lot 785,000$                     400,000$                     ‐$ 9097‐Fairview Corridor Study (Fowler Road to Calle Real) 640,100$                     500,000$                     ‐$ 9100‐Hollister Avenue/Fairview Avenue Roundabout (Intersection Improvements) 9,020,000$                  8,500,000$                  ‐$ 9102‐Storke Road Corridor Study 338,775$                     200,000$                     ‐$ 9103‐Citywide School Zones Signage & Striping Evaluation 319,950$                     300,000$                     ‐$ 9104‐Citywide Evaluatio
n of Existing Traffic Signals 318,800$                     250,000$                     ‐$ 9105‐Ellwood Beach Drive Drainage Infrastructure Replacement 300,000$                     300,000$                     ‐$ 9106‐Phelps Ditch Flood Control Channel Trash Control Structure 650,000$                     600,000$                     ‐$ 9107‐Old Town South Fairview Avenue, High Flow Trash Capture Devices 350,000$                     ‐$                              ‐$ 9109‐Ward Drive Sidewalk Infill 675,000$                     675,000$                     ‐$ TBD‐z10‐Fa
irview Avenue and Stow Canyon Road Intersection Improvements (Not established in Incode until Year of A 1,500,000$                  ‐ $                              ‐ $ Public Works ‐ Not in Annual Work Program ‐ Total 40,266,910$                $              26,425,000   $                                ‐ 10 448
Summary of CIP Projects by Annual Work Program (as of 6/9/2022) Neighborhood Services ‐ Not in Annual Work Program Total Project Costs Current Unfunded   TBD 9066‐Miscellaneous Park Improvements 734,150$                     ‐$                              ‐$ 9075‐Evergreen Park Multi‐Purpose Field ‐$                              ‐$                              ‐$ 9076‐Public Swimming Pool 4,013,697$                  4,013,697$                  ‐$ 9077‐Recreation Center/Gymnasium 3,830,000$                  3,830,000$                  ‐$ Neighborhood Services ‐ Not in Annual Work Program ‐ Total 8,577,847$                  7,843,697$                  ‐$ General Services ‐ Not in Annual Work Progr am Total Project Costs Current Unfunded   TBD 9101‐City Hall Purchase & Improvements (Elevator) 12,142,919$                ‐$                              ‐$ General Services ‐ Not in Annual Work Program ‐ Total 12,142,919$                ‐$                              ‐$ Completed Projects ‐ Pending Closeout Items Total Project Costs Current Unfunded   TBD 9009‐San Jose Creek Improvements and Fish Passage 32,081,466$                ‐$                              ‐$ 9031‐Old Town Sidewalk Improvement Project 5,416,697$                  ‐$                              ‐$ 9058‐Rectangular Rapid Flashing Beacons (RRFB)  at Chapel / Pedestrian Hybrid Beacon (PHB) at Kingston 739,238$                     ‐$                              ‐$ 9070‐Fairview Avenue/US 101 Intersection Sidewalk Infill 115,150$                     ‐$                              ‐$ Compl
eted Projects Total 38,352,551$                ‐$                              ‐$ Total  ‐ Current Annual Work Program 238,289,463$             64,416,587$                2,400,000$ Total ‐ Not In Annual Work Program 60,987,675$                34,268,697$                ‐$ GRAND TOTAL 337,629,689$             98,685,284$                2,400,000$ 11 449
ATTACHMENT 2:

Goleta’s Next 20 Year Survey Results

12 450
Attachment 2

Source: https://www.cityofgoleta.org/projects-programs/studies-and-other- projects/goleta-s-next-20-years
13 451
ATTACHMENT 3:

Preliminary Local Revenue Measure Results – June 2022

14 452
CaliforniaCityFinance.Com
Local Revenue Measure Results
June 2022

This is substantially fewer local measures,
especially school measures, than ever before
in a spring presidential or gubernatorial
primary election.

Sales Tax
Special Init 2
Sales Tax 4
Hotel
Occup Tax 4
Disposable
Cup Tax 1
G.O.

Schools
Special Districts
Counties
Cities
Schools
Cities, counties,
special districts
15 453
Local Revenue Measure Results June 2022 – 2 – PRELIMI NARY June 8, 2022

CaliforniaCityFinance.com

Total Pass Passing%
City General Tax (Majority Vote) 5 3 60%
County General Tax (Majority Vote) 4 4 100%
County Init. Special Tax -Majority Vote* 1 0 0%
SpecDistrict Init. Tax -Majority Vote* 1 1 100%
City SpecialTax or G.O.bond (2/3 Vote) 9 6 67%
County Spec.Tax, G.O.bond (2/3 Vote) 6 4 67%
SpecDistrict Tax, G.O.bond (2/3 Vote) 12 7 58%
School ParcelTax (2/3 vote) 7 7 100%
School Init. Parcel Tax -Majority Vote 1 0 0%
School Bond 55% vote 21 15 71%
Total 67 47 70%
The City/County of San Francisco is counted as a city
Local Revenue Measures June 2022
Local Revenue Measures in California
City General Tax (majority vote) 11/14 78.6% 12/14 85.7% 10/11 90.9% 8/8 100.0% 13/13 100.0% 17/18 94.4% 23/34 67.6% 3/5 60.0% County General Tax (majority v ote) 1/1 100.0% 2/2 100.0% 4/7 57.1% /0 /2 0.0% 7/10 70.0% 3/9 33.3% 4/4 100.0% Special Dist. Majority Fee (majority v ote) / 1/1 100.0% // 1 /1 100.0% / / City Initiative Special Tax (majority vote) / / / / 1/1 100.0% / / County Initiative Special Tax (majority vote) / / / / / / 0/1 0.0% Special District Initiativ e Special Tax (majority v ote) / / / / / / 1/1 100.0% City SpecialTax orG.O.bond (2/3 vote) 2/5 40.0% 5/9 55.6% 2/8 25.0% 8/11 72.7% 7/10 70.0% 6/9 66.7% 8/16 50.0% 6/9 66.7% County Special Tax (2/3 vote) 1/2 50.0% 1/1 100.0% 3/3 100.0% 2/5 40.0% 1/5 20.0% 0/2 0.0% 0/4 0.0% 4/6 66.7% Special District (2/3 v ote) 5/10 50.0% 7/11 63.6% 4/10 40.0% 9/12 75.0% 2/6 33.3% 9/18 50.0% 3/26 11.5% 7/12 58.3% School Parcel Tax (2/3 vote) 6/13 46.2% 16/22 72.7% 9/13 69.2% 5/5 100.0% 7/7 100.0% 10/11 90.9% 14/28 50.0% 7/7 100.0% School Initiative ParcelTax (majority vote) / / / / 1/1 100.0% / 0/1 0.0% School Bond 2/3 vote 1/1 100.0% // 1 /1 100.0% 1/1 100.0% 0/2 0.0% 1/2 50.0% / School Bond 55% vote 25/32 78.1% 15/20 75.0% 25/34 73.5% 32/43 74.4% 41/45 91.1% 33/38 86.8% 43/119 36.1% 15/21 71.4% Total 52/78 66.7% 58/79 73.4% 58/87 66.7% 65/85 76.5% 72/89 80.9% 85/111 76.6% 95/238 39.9% 47/67 70.1% June 2022June2008 June2010 June2012 June2014 June2016 June 2018 March 2020 © 2022 Michael Coleman
© 2022 Michael Coleman
52 58 58 65 72 85 95 47
26 21 29 20 17
26 143
20 0
50 100
150
200
250
June2008 June2010 June2012 June2014 June2016 June2018 Mar2020 June2022 Pass Fail
40%
70%
California Local Tax and Bond Measures - Primary Elections 67% 73% 67% 77% 81% 77%
16 454
Local Revenue Measure Results June 2022 – 3 – PRELIMI NARY June 8, 2022

CaliforniaCityFinance.com

School Parcel Taxes 
Parcel taxes are non ad-valorem taxes on property (rate per parcel). Proceeds from parcel taxes may be used to pay for operations.

The Manhattan Beach Unified School District parcel tax measure was placed on the ballot via citizen initiative and therefore, under recent court rulings, required only majority approval for passage. Unlike the other school parcel tax measures in this election, this was a new tax. The measure was defeated. 100% (7/7)
71% (15/21)
0% (0/1)
0% 20% 40% 60% 80% 100%
2/3 Vote
Parcel Tax*
55% Vote
Bond
Initiative
Parcel Tax
(Majority
Vote)
Percent Passing
School Tax & Bond Measures June 2022
Since 2001 84%
Since 2001 66%
17 455
Local Revenue Measure Results June 2022 – 4 – PRELIMI NARY June 8, 2022

CaliforniaCityFinance.com

School Bonds 
There were 21 local school bonds on the ballot this election, each requiring 55 percent approval. On election night, 15 are passing.

School Parcel Taxes (2/3 voter approval)
Agency Name County Rate Sunset YES% NO%
Kenwood SD Sonom a Measure A $52/yr ex tend 5yrs 78.5% 21.5% PASS Larkspur-Corte Madera SD Marin Measure E $910/yr extend 10yrs 75.7% 24.3% PASS Milpitas USD Santa Clara Measure E $84/yr ex tend 8yrs 74.7% 25.3% PASS Belm ont-Redwood Shores SD San Mateo Measure C $292/yr ex tend 10yrs 72.7% 27.3% PASS Alum Rock SD Santa Clara Measure I $214/yr ex tend 7yrs 70.8% 29.2% PASS Brisbane SD San Mateo Measure G $131/yr ex tend 6yrs 69.6% 30.4% PASS Mount Pleasant SD Santa Clara Measure H $84/yr ex tend 8yrs 67.5% 32.5% PASS School Parcel Tax - Majority Vote via Initiative
Manhattan Beach USD Los Angeles Measure A $1095/yr increase 12yrs 31. 2% 68.8% FAIL School Bond Measures - 55% Approval
School District County Meas ure Amount YES% NO%
Westside Elem entary School District Fresno Measure A 4,500,000 88.2% 11.8% PASS San Lucas Union School District Monterey Measure C 3,600,000 73.7% 26.3% PASS Ravenswood City SD San Mateo Measure I 110,000,000 68.1% 31.9% PASS Westm orland Union Elementary SD Im perial Measure w 3,750,000 67.3% 32.7% PASS Westm orland Union Elementary SD Im perial Measure z 3,750,000 66.7% 33.3% PASS Mill Valley SD Marin Measure G 194,000,000 66.1% 33.9% PASS San Rafael City HSD Marin Measure B 216,000,000 65.1% 34.9% PASS San Rafael City ESD Marin Measure C 152,000,000 64.3% 35.8% PASS Muroc Joint USD Kern / San Bernardino Measure B 21,000,000 62.8% 37.2% PASS Anderson V alley USD Mendocino Measure M 13,000,000 62.5% 37.5% PASS Jefferson ESD San Mateo Measure J 45,000,000 61.4% 38.6% PASS Little Lake City SD Los Angeles Meas ure LL 36,000,000 60.5% 39.5% PASS El Centro Elementary SD Imperial Measure y 37,800,000 60.4% 39.6% PASS Hillsborough City SD San Mateo Measure H 140,000,000 59.5% 40.5% PASS Chowchilla UHSD Madera Measure S 25,100,000 58.1% 41.9% PASS Frem ont Union HSD Santa Clara Measure G 275,000,000 54.4% 45.6% FAIL Alameda USD Alameda Measure B 298,000,000 53.9% 46.1% FAIL Sierra Sands USD Kern / San Bernardino Measure C 52,800,000 53.7% 46.3% FAIL Millbrae ESD San Mateo Measure E 90,000,000 50.8% 49.2% FAIL Imperial Unified SD Imperial Measure A 50,000,000 50.8% 49.2% FAIL Merced River Union Elementary SD Merced Measure T 3,500,000 23.5% 76.5% FAIL 18 456
Local Revenue Measure Results June 2022 – 5 – PRELIMI NARY June 8, 2022

City, County, Special District Tax & Bond Measures June 2022 63% (17/27)
78% (7/9)
50% 1/2
0% 20% 40% 60% 80% 100%
Special Tax 2/3
Voter Measures
Initiative Special
Tax (Majority
Vote)
General Tax
Majority Vote
Measures*
Percent Passing
Since 2001 76%
Since 2001 49%
0 1
1 1
2 3
3 3
11 1
1 2
1 1
1 1
5 Cannabis Tax Special 2/3
Disposable Cup Tax
Sales Tax - Init Special
G.O. Bond
Vehicle Registr Tax 2/3
Hotel Occup Tax
Sales Tax Special 2/3
Sales Tax
Parcel Tax 2/3
Passing
Failing
City, County, Special District Tax & Bond Measures June 2022 19 457
Local Revenue Measure Results June 2022 – 6 – PRELIMI NARY June 8, 2022

There were also four special add-on sales tax measures for specific purposes.

City, County and Special District Parcel Taxes (2/3 vote) Agency Name County Amount YES% NO%
Fallen Leaf Lake Community Service District El Dorado Measure A $6 60+/yr 87.5% 12.5% PASS ex tend Ross Marin Measure I $94.5+/yr 87.3% 12.7% PASS ex tend Firehouse Community Park Agency Marin Measure M $75/yr 85.3% 14.7% PASS increase Sleepy Hollow Fire Protection District Marin Measure L $94.5+/yr 84.4% 15.7% PASS ex tend Kentfield Fire Protection District Marin Measure K $94.5+/yr 83.5% 16.5% PASS ex tend San Anselmo Marin Measure J $94.5+/yr 80.7% 19.3% PASS ex tend Oakland Alameda Measure C $114.50/yr 80.4% 19.6% PASS ex tend L arkspur Marin Measure H $94.5+/yr 79.9% 20.1% PASS ex tend South County Am bulance Zone CSA No. 21 Tuolumne Measure W $90/yr 78.6% 21.4% PASS ex tend Sundance Trail Zone of Benefit El Dorado Measure C $600+/yr 75.6% 24.4% PASS increase River Delta Fire District Sacramento Measure H $90/yr 71.0% 29.0% PASS increase Martinez Contra Costa Measure F $79/yr 65.9% 34.1% FAIL increase Ex eter Public Cemetery Tulare Measure U $35/yr 61.1% 38.9% FAIL increase Oceano Community Services District San Luis Obispo Measure A $180+ /yr 60.9% 39.1% FAIL increase Knolls Property Owners Com munity Service DEl Dorado Measure B $300+/yr 57.9% 42.1% FAIL increase Cascade Drainage Zone of Benefit El Dorado Measure E $350/yr 0.0% 100.0% FAIL increase Transactions and Use Tax (Add-on Sales Tax) - General Tax - Majority Approval City County Meas ure Rate YES% NO% incr/ext
Torrance Los Angeles Measure SST 1/2 cent 55.2% 44.9% PASS increase Susanvi l l e L assen Measure P 1 cent 54.5% 45.5% PASS increase Santa Cruz Santa Cruz Measure F 1/2 cent 50.2% 49.8% PASS increase Avalon Los Angeles Measure S 1/4 cent 34.8% 65.3% FAIL increase Transactions and Use Tax (Add-on Sales Tax) - Special Tax - Two-Thirds Approval Agency Name County Rate Purpose Sunset YES% NO%
County of Fresno Fresno Measure Z 1/10 cent zoo 15yrs 82.4% 17.6% PASS ex tend Truckee Nevada Measure U by 1/4 cent to
1/2 cent
open space
/ trails none 76.4% 23.6% PASS increase
County of Marin Marin Measure A 1/4 cent open space
/ trails 9yrs 74.8% 25.2% PASS ex tend
County of Napa Napa Measure L 1/4 cent fire 10yrs 58.4% 41.6% FAIL increase 20 458
Local Revenue Measure Results June 2022 – 7 – PRELIMI NARY June 8, 2022

Transient Occupancy Taxes 
There were four Transient Occupancy Tax (Hotel Tax) measures, a ll for general purposes requiring majority voter approval.

General Obligation Bonds 
There were three non-school general obligation bonds. On election night, only the City of Saint Helena water bond appears to be passing.

Transactions and Use Tax (Add-on Sales Tax) - Initiative Special Tax - Majority Vote Agency Name County Rate Purpose Sunset YES% NO%
John C. Fremont Healthcare District Mariposa Measure N 1 cent hospi tal 40yrs 71.6% 28.4% PASS increase County of Kings Kings Measure F 1/2 cent fire none 37.6% 62.4% FAIL increase Transient Occupancy Tax Tax Measures: Majority Vote General Use Agency Name County Rate YES% NO%
County of Placer - North Tahoe TOT Area Placer Measure A by 2% to 10% 86.8% 13.3% PASS ex tend County of Santa Cruz Unincorporated Santa Cruz Measure B by 1% to 12% 68.6% 31.4% PASS increase County of Hum boldt Unincorporated Hum boldt Measure J by 2% to 12% 63.3% 36.7% PASS ex pand Avalon Los Angeles Meas ure TT by 1% to 13% 48.9% 51.1% FAIL increase Agency Name Meas ure Amount YES% NO% Pass/Faincr/ext
County of Hum boldt Hum boldt Measure K $1/veh 79.5% 20.5% PASS ex tend County of Contra Costa Contra Costa Measure G $1/veh 68.7% 31.3% PASS ex tend County of Sacramento Sacramento Measure C $1/veh 58.6% 41.4% FAIL ex tend Abandoned Vehicle Abatement Tax
(Fees prior to Prop26 of 2010) - 2/3 voter approval required City, County and Special District General Obligation Bond Measure s (2/3 vote ) Agency County Amount YES% NO%
Saint Helena Napa Measure H 19,150,000$ water 77.3% 22.7% PASS San Francisco San Francisco Propos ition A 400,000,000$ public transportation 63.3% 36.7% FAIL Antelope Valley Healthcare District Los Angeles Measure H 400,000,000$ hospital 56.5% 43.5% FAIL 21 459
Local Revenue Measure Results June 2022 – 8 – PRELIMI NARY June 8, 2022

Single Use Cup Tax - Majority Vote General Use
Agency Name County Rate Sunset YES% NO%
County of Santa Cruz Unincorporated Santa Cruz Measure C 12.5cents /cup none 68.2% 31.8% PASS Cannabis Taxes - Two-Thirds Vote Special Purpose
Agency Name County Rate Sunset YES% NO%
Huntington Beach Orange Measure A 6% of gross receipts none 66.3% 33.7% FAIL 22 460
Local Revenue Measure Results June 2022 – 9 – PRELIMI NARY June 8, 2022

CaliforniaCityFinance.com

Other Municipal Measures of Note 

Five term limits measures passed.

************
For more information: Michael Coleman 530-758-3952. [email protected]

Appointed City Clerk / City Treasurer / etc.

Priority Spending Plan PowerPoint Presentation

24 462
City of Goleta
City Council Workshop
June 14, 2022
Priority Spending
Plan Workshop
25 463
Goleta has weathered the pandemic and associated
economic challenges using a hiring freeze and
postponing capital maintenance and improvements.

However, even prior to the pandemic, the City did not
have sufficient funding to keep up with capital asset
depreciation and investments in infrastructure.

City revenues are sufficient to get by, but not enough
to achieve goals in the City Council’s Strategic Plan or address the backlog of critical deferred maintenance.

City revenues are also reduced because of the
Revenue Neutrality Agreement (RNA) between the
City and the County.
2 Does Goleta Need
Additional
Revenues?
Background
26 464
3 How Are Funds
Currently
Allocated?
General
Government
14%
General
Services
8%
Library
1%
Finance
4%
Planning & Env.

Review
10%Public Works
18%
Neighborhood
Services
5%
Public Safety
22%
Non-
Departmental
2%
CIP
16%
General Fund – FY 22/23 - $44.1 M
General Government
8%
General Services
4% Library Services
4%
Finance
2%
Planning &
Environmental Review
5%
Public Works
16%
Neighborhood
Services
4%
Police
Services
12%
Non-Departmental
3%
CIP
42%
All Funds – FY 22/23 - $81.25
• All funds includes Gas Tax, Measure A,
library and street lighting assessments,
DIFs,
state and federal grants and ARPA
• General Fund includes use of one-time
funds from fund balance for one-time
expenditures
27 465
4 Potential Revenue
Enhancements
The City Council has studied a range of options to
provide locally-controlled, ongoing revenue to meet the City’s growing needs and ensure financial stability:
• 1¢ Sales Tax generating approximately $10.6M/year;
• 6% Utility Users Tax generating approximately
$4M/year
• $100 per parcel tax generating approximately
$1M/year
• Business License Tax based on employees, square
footage or gross income generating
approximately
$2M/year depending on specifics
• Transient Occupancy Tax increase generating
approximately $3M/year
28 466
5 Rationale for a
Sales Tax
A sales tax stands out for several reasons

1. An estimated 44% of the sales tax increase would
be paid by visitors and other non-residents. It
would apply to everyone who purchases retail
goods within City limits.

3. It is familiar to the public, and preferred to
alternative forms of revenue enhancement
29 467
6 Rationale for a
Sales Tax
A sales tax stands out for several reasons:
(continued):

4. Goleta currently is tied for the lowest sales tax rate among cities in Santa Barbara County.

5. Unlike other cities in the County and the state,
Goleta does not receive the full 1% of the baseline

7.75% sales tax that all CA cities collect. The
County receives 30% (over $ 3 million) of Goleta’s
1%.

6. Goleta would retain 100% of any new sales tax
approved by local voters.
30 468
Sales Tax Exemptions
Qualifying purchases made in the City of Goleta are subject to the tax. This includes items such as clothing, cars, household goods and alcohol. Pursuant to California Revenue and Taxation Code, food groceries, prescriptions, certain medical devices, and other “Necessities of Life” are exempt from sales taxes. 31 469
8 History of the
Sales Tax in
Goleta
$3.5M $3.6M $3.9M $4.M $4.1M $4.2M
$3.4M $3.3M
$3.9M $3.8M
$5.8M
$6.8M
$6.3M $6.2M $6.5M $6.4M
$7.M $6.7M
$7.6M
$8.1M
0% 4% 7% 5% 2% 1%
-19%
-1%
18%
-2%
50%
18%
-7% -2%
4% -1%
9%
-4%
13% 7%
-20%
0%
20%
40%
60%
80%
100%
120%
140%
$0M
$1M
$2M
$3M
$4M
$5M
$6M
$7M
$8M
$9M
Change from Prior Year
Sales Tax

MILLIONS
Sales Tax Revenues
Sales Tax Revenue Change from Prior Year
Great
Recession
COVID-19
Time Period Description
2002 - 2012 At start of City incorpor ation, the County received 50% of the City’s Sales Tax allocation, and then reduced to 30% starting in FY 12/13
4/1/2009 – 6/30/2011 The State of CA increased their sales tax rate to 7.75%, making Goleta’s overall sales tax rate temporarily at 8.75% during the Great Recession
7/1/2011 – 12/31/2012 Goleta’s overall sales tax rate back to 7.75% 1/11/2013 – 12/31/2016 Goleta’s overall sales tax rate temporarily increased to 8.00% due to the State of CA 1/1/2017 - Now Goleta’s overall sales rate went back to 7.75% Sales Tax History
32 470
9 Goleta’s Property
Tax and Sales Tax
are not fully
allocated to the
City
Lompoc
Buellton
Santa Maria
Santa Barbara
Guadalupe
Carpinteria
Solvang
Goleta

0.00%

2.00%

4.00%

6.00%

8.00%

10.00%

12.00%

14.00%

16.00%

18.00%

20.00%
City Property Tax %
Share of 1% Property Tax
By City
Average County
Share – All Cities Average City & County Share
from Goleta
 The City of Goleta receives the lowest property tax percentage among Santa Barbara County cities. Goleta shares 50% of its pro
perty tax allocation with the County, per the RNA.
 If the RNA did not exist, Goleta’s property tax allocation would be approximately 10% instead of 5%
Property Tax Allocations by City
33 471
10 Goleta’s Property
Tax and Sales Tax
are not fully
allocated to the
City
 The City of Goleta receives the lowest property tax percentage among Santa Barbara County cities. Goleta shares 50% of its pro
perty tax allocation with the County, per the RNA.
 If the RNA did not exist, Goleta’s property tax allocation would be approximately 10% instead of 5%
Where do Goleta’s Property Tax Go?
Dependent Districts, 1.62%
Independent Districts, 4.31%
Goleta, 5.10%
County, 11.10%
County Fire, 14.84%
Schools, 63.02%

0.00%

10.00%

20.00%

30.00%

40.00%

50.00%

60.00%

70.00%

80.00%

90.00%
100.00%
Property Tax Share
City of Goleta Property Tax Allocations
Schools
County Fire
County
Goleta
Independent Districts
Dependent Districts
34 472
11 Goleta’s Property
Tax and Sales Tax
are not fully
allocated to the
City
 Almost all Cities in California receive the base 1% allocation of the sales tax, except Goleta  Goleta receives the lowest sales tax allocation of the base 1%, due to the RNA. 30% goes to the County.

1.00%

2.25%

0.70%

1.25%

2.00%

1.00%

0.50%

2.313%

2.613%

2.313%

3.9375%

7.7500%

9.0000%

7.7500%

8.0000%

8.7500%

7.7500%

CITY OF BUELLTO N
CITY OF CARP IN T E R I A (1)

CITY OF GOLETA
CITY OF GUAD ALUP E (2)
CITY OF LOMP OC ( 3)
CITY OF SANTA BARBAR A (4)
CITY OF SANTA MARIA ( 5)

CITY OF SOLV ANG

City of Santa Maria then passed a sales tax renewal measure to increase the 0.25% rate to 1% with no sunset clause at the N ovember 6, 2018 General Election.

Sales Tax Allocations by City
35 473
12 Goleta’s Property
Tax and Sales Tax
are not fully
allocated to the
City
Other Cities Nearby with Additional Sales Tax
Ventura County:

Tax Area Rate
Effective Date
Arroyo Grande (City) 0.50% 4/1/2007
Atascadero (City) 1.00% 4/1/2
021
Atascadero (City) 0.50% 4/1/2015
Grover Beach (City) 1.50% 4/1/2021
Grover Beach (City) 0.50% 4/1/2007
Morro Bay (City) 1.50% 4/1/2021
Morro Bay (City) 0.50% 4/1/2007
Paso Robles (City) 1.00% 4/1/2021
Paso Robles (City) 0.50% 4/1/2013
Pismo Beach (City) 0.50% 10/1/2008
San Luis Obispo (City) 1.50% 4/1/2021
San Luis Obispo (City) 0.50% 4/1/2007
36 474
Preliminary – Local Add-On Sales Tax Measure – June 2022 Election 37 475
14 Consistent
Support for a
Sales Tax
Increase
Generation
Four separate public opinion surveys indicate support
for enhanced revenue generation through a one cent
increase in the City’s sales tax.
38 476
Public Opinion Polling Data and Budget Priorities
Helping prevent brush fires caused by illegal encampments, protecting creeks and coastal waters from pollution, and supporting public safety response are among the potential uses of the funds considered extremely/very important by seven in ten voters or more.

Ext./Very
Impt.
73%
71%
71%
71%
71%
70%
70%
70%
37%
36%
33%
32%
28%
34%
31%
30%
36%
35%
38%
38%
43%
36%
39%
40%
19%
20%
19%
23%
22%
23%
25%
22%
8%
9%
10%
7%
8%
7%
5%
8%
Helping prevent brush fires caused by illegal
encampments
Protecting creeks and coastal waters from pollution
Supporting public safety, and
911 response
Preventing pollution from entering local creeks and
coastal waters
Keeping public areas clean and safe
Protecting public health and safety
Increasing the use of recycled water to irrigate parks
and fields
^Repairing streets and potholes
Ext. Impt. Very Impt. Smwt. Impt. Not Too Impt./Don't Know (Ranked by Extremely/Very Important)
Q. I am now going to read you a list of possible uses for the funds that might be included in this local ballot measure. Regardless of how you feel about this measure, please tell me how important it is to you personally that each use of funds is included in the measure: extremely important, very important, somewhat important, or not too important. ^Not Part of Split Sample
39 477
Public Opinion Polling Data and Budget Priorities
(Ranked by Extremely/Very Important)
Ext./Very
Impt.
69%
67%
67%
67%
66%
66%
65%
64%
29%
32%
31%
23%
35%
27%
25%
37%
40%
35%
36%
44%
31%
39%
40%
26%
24%
23%
20%
28%
20%
23%
26%
25%
7%
11%
12%
14%
12%
10%
11%
Retaining and attracting local businesses and jobs
Maintaining open spaces and natural areas
Retaining local businesses and jobs
Keeping parks clean and safe
Maintaining open space
^Protecting Goleta’s long-term financial stability
Addressing homelessness
Ext. Impt. Very Impt. Smwt. Impt. Not Too Impt./Don't Know Q. I am now going to read you a list of possible uses for the funds that might be included in this local ballot measure. Regardless of how you feel about this measure, please tell me how important it is to you personally that each use of funds is included in the measure: extremely important, very important, somewhat important, or not too important. ^Not Part of Split Sample Continued
40 478
17 Community
Survey Results
(as of April 30, 2022)
Below is a list of priorities that will require additional resources. In April over 600 Goleta residents ranked the priorities by level of importance. Here are the community services that were ranked as high or medium priority:

Survey Results Are In!
Keeping public areas safe and clean 97%
Paving streets, removing potholes, and improving traffic safety 95% Protecting Goleta’s long-term financial stability 94%
Supporting public safety and maintaining rapid 911 response 93% Maintaining open spaces and natural areas 93%
Preparing for wildfires, floods, natural disasters, and public health emergencies 93% Protecting local creeks and coastal waters from pollution 92% Conserving water by increasing use of recycled water to irrigate parks and fields 92% Preventing brush fires caused by illegal encampments 91% Maintaining services for low-income senior citizens and other vulnerable residents 85% Addressing homelessness through our Homelessness Strategic Plan 84% Helping local businesses rebound and retain the workforce to fill critical jobs 79% Improving access to affordable housing for middle- and working-class families 78% Supporting and expanding afterschool programs and affordable early childhood/childcare programs 73%
41 479
18 What is
Unfunded?
• Capital Improvement Program (CIP) Projects
• Over $100 million
• Current City revenues are not sufficient to support debt service • Pavement Program Deficit
• Existing budget at $2.6 million, need additional ongoing of $3.4 million to maintain PCI avera
ge of 67
• Critical Maintenance Backlog
• Old buildings (Library, Community Center, Stow House and Historic Train Depot)
• Other facility impr
ovements, fixture and equipment replacements,
and establishment of replacement reserves
• Public street tr
ees, sidewalks, and parks and open space
• Important Community Master Plans
• Other Unfunded Costs
• Childcare programs, Affordable Housing Program, Old Town improvements, and Public Safety and Library
42 480
19 Some
Investments
Cannot Wait
• Address homelessness
• Repair streets, remove potholes
• Provide ways to expand childcare and help make it more affordable as well as to expand opportunities for
aft
erschool programs
• Prevent polluted stormwater runoff from entering local creeks and coastal wat
ers
• Restore local creeks and add more bicycle and pedestrian routes
• Increase affordable housing
• Prov
ide programs to assist local businesses and families
facing economic hardship
Why the need to add revenues?
43 481
20 We must avoid
falling behind
on our
investments
The City should not let its investment in
strategic planning go to waste
Existing Strategic Plans
• Creek and Watershed Management Plan
• Butterfly Habitat Management Plan
• Parks, Facilities and Playgrounds Master Plan
• Bicycle and Pedestrian Master Plan
• Homelessness Strategic Plan
• Strategic Energy and Climate Action Plan
• Pavement Condition Index Goal
Plans that are soon to be started or complet
ed
• Old Town Visioning Process
• Community Center Strategic Plan
• Economic Development Strategic Plan
• Child Care Master Plan
• Lake Los Carneros Master Plan Update
• Affordable Housing Plan
44 482
21 What if Goleta
does not
address its
deferred
maintenance?
Failing to address deferred maintenance and backlog of priorities will result in increasing costs and other issues, including safety hazards, health risks, compliance issues, costly emergency repairs, reduced equipment efficiency, shorter asset life cycles, poor quality facilities, and employee retention challenges.
99M 118M 134M 148M 161M 170M 179M 184M 190M 196M 202M
FY 21/22 FY 22/23 FY 23/24 FY 24/25 FY 25/26 FY 26/27 FY 27/28 FY 28/29 FY 29/30 FY 30/31 FY 31/32 Cost of Continued Deferred CIP (Unfunded Portion Only)
$10.3M annual average increase
9M 11M 12M 14M 15M 15M 19M 24M 29M
36M
45M
FY 21/22 FY 22/23 FY 23/24 FY 24/25 FY 25/26 FY 26/27 FY 27/28 FY 28/29 FY 29/30 FY 30/31 FY 31/32 Cost of Continued Deferred Maintenance
$5.8M annual increase
$1.3M annual average increase
Costs of Deferred Maintenance
45 483
22 What happens if
Goleta does not
have the
additional funding
for its pavement
program?
Pavement Program
• Goleta will struggle to keep up with the PCI average goal of 67 and roads will continue to deteriorate at a fa
ster pace
• At current funding levels, PCI levels will continue to drop and reach a PCI level of 50 by FY 30/31. Anything below 55 is considered to be in “poor” condition, and may result in in costly reconstruction instead of main
tenance
20/21 21/22 22/23 23/24 24/25 25/26 26/27 27/28 28/29 29/30 30/31 Increase to PCI Goals - ($5.8M) 62 67 67 67 67 67 67 67 67 67 67 Maintain 63 - ($4.7M) 62 63 63 63 63 63 63 63 63 63 63
Current Budget - ($2.5M) 62 62 61 60 58 57 56 54 53 51 50 Zero budget 62 61 58 56 54 51 48 46 43 40 37
30 35
40 45
50 55
60 65
70 PCI RANGE
PAVEMENT CONDITION INDEX - 10 YEAR PROJECTION
46 484
General Fund Impacts and Deferred Maintenance
$0
$10,000,000
$20,000,000
$30,000,000
$40,000,000
$50,000,000
$60,000,000
$70,000,000
$80,000,000
$90,000,000
$100,000,000
FY 21/22 FY 22/23 FY 23/24 FY 24/25 FY 25/26 FY 26/27 FY 27/28 FY 28/29 FY 29/30 FY 30/31 FY 31/32 General Fund Forecast: Revenues and Expenditures with Deferred Maintenance Surplus (Deficit) General Fund Revenues Total Expenditures Expenditures outpace Revenues
Ongoing Annual Deficit
-$50,000,000
-$45,000,000
-$40,000,000
-$35,000,000
-$30,000,000
-$25,000,000
-$20,000,000
-$15,000,000
-$10,000,000
-$5,000,000
$0
FY 21/22 FY 22/23 FY 23/24 FY 24/25 FY 25/26 FY 26/27 FY 27/28 FY 28/29 FY 29/30 FY 30/31 FY 31/32 Net Operating Revenue with Deferred Maintenance
Ongoing Annual Deficit
Average Years: 5 Years 10 Years
Average Annual Surplus (Deficit) $ (12,100,172) $ (20,736,093) Average Annual Deficit Increase
Per Year $ (1,295,627) $ (3,526,055)
Average Annual Deficit Growth
Rate 12.8% 18.7%
 Goleta cannot afford critical deferred maintenance or continue to keep putting off critical maintenance
without facing significant cost increases
 The City is at risk should another unanticipated emergency repair be needed, like the Cathedral Oaks
Cribwall Repair Project
 In an event of an emergency, the City will have to look at using the contingency reserve, possible lines
of credit and reducing
service levels permanently to afford debt service for an emergency repair
 The charts assumes the City’s current revenue stream and expenditures, with deferred mainte
nance programmed in
 A significant ongoing deficit exists and will further increase when maintenance items become major
structural repairs
or replacements which will experience significant cost
increases
47 485
24 Sample Sales
Tax Ballot
Language
• Ballot Language must be very general about what funds will be used for .
• Sample Ballot Language below:
• “To maint
ain City of Goleta services, to address public
health emergencies and natural disasters, support
public safety and 911 response, clean and maintain
public areas, retain local businesses and jobs, maintain open spaces, repair s
treets, address homelessness and
provide other general City services, shall a measure be adopted establishing a 1¢ sales tax providing
approximately $9,800,000 annually until ended by
voters, requiring annual independent audits with all
funds staying in Goleta?”
48 486
25 General
Purpose Tax
Constraints
General Purpose Tax Constraints
- As a general-purpose tax requiring majority voter
support (rather than a special tax requiring 2/3
voter support), the City cannot commit funds on
the ballot for any particular direction and must
maintain the availability of such funds for any
general purpose.
- However, the City Council can establish specific
priorities to guide the use of the new revenue
generated by a sales tax measure.
49 487
Spending Plan
26 The Council may wish to approve a
plan for how to allocate potential
new sales tax revenue to ensure that:
• Funds go to the highest priority
projects and purposes, and
• Instead of a backlog of unfunded
capital projects, strategic plans,
and degrading
roads, the
community will see progress and
accomplishments.

The plan can be revised each year or
two, as conditions warrant
50 488
Spending Plan
27 • Staff will walk Council through a
prioritization process with a
tracking spreadsheet
• Council can eng
age in a ranking
process to identify their key
priorities
• Community members are
encourag
ed to provide input on
spending priorities
• Subject to Council dire
ction,
priorities not listed can be
incorporated in the Spending
Plan
51 489
Spending Plan
28 See excel spreadsheet
52 490

Goleta City CouncilJune 21, 2022

Goleta City Council
June 21, 2022