Budget and Audit Committee Report
915 I Street, 1st Floor
Sacramento, CA 95814
www.cityofsacramento.org
File ID: 2022-00902 May 6, 2022 Discussion Item 03
Title: Measure U Community Advisory Committee Recommendations Regarding Fiscal Year (FY) 2022/23 Priorities
Location: Citywide
Recommendation: Receive and file.
Contact: Ash Roughani, Special Projects Manager, (916) 808-7751, [email protected], Office of the City Manager
Presenter: Members of the Measure U Community Advisory Committee
Attachments:
1-Description/Analysis
2-Measure U Community Advisory Committee FY2022/23 Priorities and Recommendations
Description/Analysis
Issue Detail: The Mayor and City Council established the Measure U Community Advisory Committee (Committee) in 2018 to ensure that the expenditures of City resources reflect Council and Community priorities (Resolution 2018-0393).
At its April 18, 2022 meeting, the Committee approved a letter (Attachment 2) to the City Council that outlines its priorities and recommendations for the FY2022/23 budget year.
Specifically, the Committee’s priorities are reflected in recommendations regarding metrics, participatory budgeting, affordable housing, homelessness, senior services, youth, community investment, violence prevention, high-wage job promotion, small business support, arts/Creative Edge, library services, and Measure U branding.
Policy Considerations: City Council Resolution 2018-0393 adopted October 2, 2018 outlines the purpose, and the powers and duties of the Measure U Committee. Specifically, the Resolution states, to ensure that the expenditures of City resources reflect Council and community priorities, the Committee shall review, report, and make non-binding recommendations on revenue and expenditures of certain funds from the Transactions and Use Tax (Sacramento City Code chapter 3.27.).
Economic Impacts: None.
Environmental Considerations:
California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA): This report concerns administrative activities and governmental fiscal activities that do not constitute a “project” as defined by the CEQA Guidelines Sections 15378(b)(2) and 15378(b)(4) and are not subject to the provisions of CEQA (CEQA Guidelines Section 15060(c)(3)).
Sustainability: None.
Commission/Committee Action: The priorities in this report were approved by the Committee on April 18, 2022.
Rationale for Recommendation: None.
Financial Considerations: Council may need to reallocate existing commitments to implement the Committee’s recommendations and maintain a balanced budget.
Local Business Enterprise (LBE): None.
Measure U Budget Recommendations 2022 - 2023April 18, 2022 Mayor and CouncilmembersCity of SacramentoNew City Hall915 I StreetSacramento, CA 95815 RE: Measure U Recommendations to Council FY 22/23
Dear Mayor Steinberg and Councilmembers:
City Council Resolution 2018-0393 adopted October 2, 2018, outlines the purpose and thepowers and duties of the Measure U Committee specifically, to ensure that the expenditures ofCity resources reflect Council and community priorities, the committee shall review, report, andmake non-binding recommendations on revenue and expenditures of certain funds from theTransactions and Use Tax (Sacramento City Code chapter 3.27.).In addition to services previously supported by the original Measure U, the 2018 ballot initiativespecified the following uses: other essential services, including homeless supportive services,affordable housing, libraries, park maintenance, high-wage job promotion, and youthprogramming.When the City Council adopted the FY2021/22 Operating Budget, the Councildirected the City Manager to realign the Measure U expenditures to better reflect Council’spriorities for the use of the revenues.A guidingquestion for the Committee in developing theserecommendations is:What services are we able to providethat we weren’t able to providebefore the 2018 Measure U was passed to meet the most pressing needs in our communities?Under this authorization and with this guiding framework, we provide the followingrecommendations regarding the 2022-2023 budget.
Metrics:Admittedly, the Committee was disappointedto learn that the city’s plans to publish adashboard with the City's performance measures (defined outcomes and assessment ofprogress listed onpage 41-43of the 21/22 budget)are on hold until because of technicalissues. We want to reiterate the importance of systematically tracking performance metrics thatdescribe the outcomes (how well programs are functioning and their human impact) and not justinputs and outputs of City operations. We also reiterate a previous recommendation to conducta neighborhood analysis of equity in investments. Additionally, it would be helpful to have aSpending Database for the City. This would provide a mechanism to have a better idea ofinvestments by neighborhood, income, race/ethnicity, and language spoken and to developgeographic- and demographic-specific plans for future spending.
Participatory Budgeting [$2.5 million]:We recommend$2.5 million in additional funding:$500,000 for consultants, outreach activities/media, and evaluation. We also recommend atleast $2 million in additional funding for community-identified projects.
Affordable Housing:We recommend that funding be spenton direct financial investments todrive in state and federal match dollars for affordable housing and homelessness prevention bysupporting Sacramento residents in maintaining housing through mortgage and rentalassistance and providing additional gap funding for new affordable housing developments.
To this end, we recommend contributing Measure U funds to the Affordable Housing Trust Fundbe allocated for development of place based neighborhood planning, which includes: homerepair and waived code enforcement fees for elderly and/or low-income homeowners, first-timehome buyers’ program, homelessness prevention programs and jobs enterprise efforts forhistorically underserved neighborhoods, e.g. Glen Elder, Gardenland, Del Paso Heights,Meadowview.
Homelessness:Continue to use Measure U funds fordirect programs and services responsiblefor moving individuals and families into more stable environments, addressing barriers, andmoving people from homelessness to housing. We reiterate our recommendation from the FY21-22 mid-year letter that funding be spent to 1) add to the current $2.8 millionHomelessHousing Initiativesallocation to expand service provisionbeyond women and children under 14to include older children, people of other genders, and veterans; 2) add to the allocation toRespite Centersto expand the availability of shelterfor inclement weather and Safe Groundsites. In addition, directly funding the development of permanent supportive housing includingthrough Project Homekey and transitional housing is critical to the success of the City’s efforts toend homelessness. Measure U funds should also be directed to supporting those importantefforts.
Senior Services:We have a growing elderly populationin Sacramento with unique needs thatthe city should identify and support. We recommend funding be spent to expand the servicehours, geographic availability, and language access to services such as Hart Senior Center,Triple R Program, 50+ Wellness Program, Caring Neighborhoods Program, StanfordSettlement, Tech Connections, and Information and Assistance Program.
Youth:We are pleased that funds from Measure U havebeen invested in youth. TheCommittee recommends that the Council continue to prioritize investing in programs andservices for youth, especially those from historically underserved communities, provided by theCity and in partnership with community-based organizations, to ensure community well-being.We recommend that funding be spent to expand programming for youth K-12, youth under 26,culturally relevant services for Native and Hmong youth as well as youth from refugee familiesand to support a protected and earmarked city fund for children and youth.
Expanding on the recommendation above for performance metrics, contained within theSpending Database for the City should be a list of organizations that have received funding fromthe youth development grant program and the zip codes of the youth served to understand andassure that MU funds are being used to serve the communities with demonstrated need and tomake recommendations for future funding to fill gaps.
Community Investment:We want to emphasize the importantrole of Community Centers inserving a variety of neighborhoods and demographics and encourage the Council to considerincreasing investments in their services and operations.
We also reiterate previous recommendations to only include in the youth line item investmentsthat arespecificto youth. Some investments – whichwe support and are important parts of cityinfrastructure – are best categorized as general Community Investments: examples includeAquatics, Camp Sacramento, and the Sacramento Zoo.
Violence Prevention: community violence preventionprograms by age and zip High wage job promotion(inclusive economic development): In addition to the $2 milliontoward the Housing Trust fund outlined below to provide similar services (which include jobsenterprise) to those in Aggie Square to another neighborhood in need, the Committee focusedits attention on bolstering an existing program: Thousand Strong. Currently participation is lowand costly to employers. Additional investments could turn this into a meaningful and effectivejob training program for youth.Small Business support [$800,000]:For façade improvementgrants to allow businesses /property owners to apply for funds to fix vandalized windows and doors that are often destroyedafter hours or during a business burglary. One suggestion to ensure access is to use a rankingsystem that would prioritize the geographical areas where there has been historical lack ofpublic investment to ensure that this type of programming would reach across the city to ensurethe areas of our city that don’t have PBIDs (e.g. Gardenland/Northgate, North Sac, Freeport,Meadowview) have access to the funding.Arts/Creative Edge: We recommend additional MeasureU investments in this category befocused on youth in traditionally underserved communities.
Library:We recommend adding funding to support additional staffing and operating expensesto expand hours of service to 8 hours per day at least 6 days per week. Operating hours shouldbe responsive to community needs and use.
Branding Measure U Funding:In the mid-year 21/22 recommendations, the Committeerecommends that the City brand Measure U investments in the city by directing staff to developa logo, identify sign placement and assess printing and installation costs. We are pleased thatthe City adopted our recommendation to develop a logo as well as a communication plan thatwill be utilized by all departments receiving Measure U funds.
Thank you for considering these recommendations and for the opportunity to serve ourcommunity in this important endeavor.
Sincerely,
The Measure U Community Advisory Committee