City of Sacramento
Budget and Audit Committee Report
915 I Street Sacramento, CA 95814
www.cityofsacramento.org
File ID: 2024-01108 5/28/2024 Discussion Item 5.
Measure U Community Advisory Committee Follow-up Recommendations Regarding Fiscal Year (FY) 2024/25 Budget Priorities
File ID: 2024-01108
Location: Citywide
Recommendation: 1) Discuss and consider Measure U Community Advisory Committee follow-up recommendations regarding FY2024/25 Budget priorities; and 2) pass a Motion either: a) forwarding one or more recommendations to the City Council for consideration; b) directing the Measure U Community Advisory Committee and/or staff to come back to the Budget and Audit Committee with more information regarding the recommendations; or c) holding the recommendations in Committee.
Contact: Ash Roughani, Special Projects Manager, (916) 808-7751, [email protected], Office of the City Manager Presenter: Marjorie Dickinson, Chair, Measure U Community Advisory Committee Attachments:
1-Description/Analysis
2-May 2024 Measure U Committee FY2024/25 Follow-up Budget Recommendations 3-April 2024 Measure U Committee FY2024/25 Budget Priorities and Recommendations Description/Analysis
Issue Detail: The Mayor and City Council established the Measure U Community Advisory Committee (Measure U Committee) in 2018 to ensure that the expenditures of City resources reflect Council and Community priorities (Resolution 2018-0393).
On April 9, 2024, the Measure U Committee presented its priorities and recommendations for the FY2024/25 budget year to the Budget and Audit Committee (Attachment 3). In response to the City Manager’s FY2024/25 Proposed Budget, the Measure U Committee subsequently adopted follow-up recommendations at their May 20, 2024 meeting (Attachment 2).
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
File ID: 2024-01108 5/28/2024 Discussion Item 5.
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 recommendations in this report were approved by the Measure U Committee on May 20, 2024.
Rationale for Recommendation: The City Council established the Measure U Committee to advise the Council on community priorities with respect to Measure U revenues and expenditures.
Financial Considerations: Council may need to reallocate proposed or existing commitments to implement the Committee’s recommendations and maintain a balanced budget.
Local Business Enterprise (LBE): None.
May 22, 2024
Mayor and Councilmembers
City Hall 915 I Street
Sacramento, CA 95814
RE: Measure U Budget Recommendations to Council FY 2024/25 Dear Mayor Steinberg and Councilmembers:
The Measure U Advisory Committee (the Committee), as our duty to advise the Council on priorities, review performance measures, and evaluate city expenditures, offers the following recommendations:
• RECOMMENDATION 1: Align FY2024/25 spending with community priorities to fund affordable housing and homelessness. There is a strong consensus among Committee members for the city to prioritize addressing affordable housing and homelessness in its Measure U spending. We reiterate our April 2 recommendation for the Council to prioritize these areas in the budget. • RECOMMENDATION 2: Allocate $1,000,000 to fund a new round of participatory budgeting. It is critical that the city not lose momentum, or the institutional memory of Committee members, city staff, and community members who worked on the initial participatory budgeting pilot. The city’s deficit makes it more important than ever for residents to be involved with the decision making on where resources are needed, and to improve trust in their government. We reiterate our April 2 recommendation for the Council to fund a new round of participatory budgeting. • RECOMMENDATION 3: The Committee requests $16,000, to convene two focus groups. A duty of the Committee is to work with City staff on community engagement, yet the Committee has never had a budget for this purpose. In 2022, approximately 500 respondents to the City Auditor’s Community Survey indicated their interest in participating in a focus group regarding the use of Measure U funds and provided their email address to be contacted. The Committee wishes to engage these residents in a deeper conversation on Measure U’s purpose, efficacy, and future. We have developed a budget for $7,800 per meeting, and seeks funds to convene these focus groups this year. We request this modest investment to begin deeper engagement with interested residents.
• RECOMMENDATION 4: Put equity considerations at the forefront of its choices, and to prioritize historically underinvested communities in the budget. The Committee thanks the Council for keeping equity in mind as it develops a budget under challenging circumstances. A city’s budget is an expression of its values, and the Committee once again urges the Council to keep a focus on equity as it decides on Measure U spending.
• RECOMMENDATION 5: Support for restoring funding to programs recommended in Mayor Steinberg’s May 17 letter. The Committee appreciates the Mayor’s approach to protecting programs that impact youth, inclusivity, and community. We especially support the recommendation for a restoration of funds to the RT Fare-Free Youth Transit Program.
Attached to this letter as Addendum 1 is the Committee’s April 2 letter for your reference. Thank you for considering these recommendations and for the opportunity to serve our community.
Sincerely,
The Measure U Community Advisory Committee
April 2, 2024
Mayor and Councilmembers
City Hall
915 I Street
Sacramento, CA 95814
RE: Measure U Budget Recommendations to Council FY 2024/25 Dear Mayor Steinberg and Councilmembers:
The Measure U Advisory Committee (the Committee) appreciates the budget challenge that the city has to reckon with over the next few months. The deficit will force the City Council to make many difficult choices. A city’s budget is an expression of its values, and as such, we urge the City Council to put equity considerations at the forefront of its choices, and to prioritize historically underinvested communities in the budget. As our duty to advise the Council on priorities, review performance measures, and evaluate city expenditures, the Committee offers the following recommendations:
● RECOMMENDATION 1: Align FY2024/25 Spending with Community Priorities to Fund Affordable Housing and Homelessness
● RECOMMENDATION 2: Allocate $1,000,000 to Fund a New Round of Participatory Budgeting ● RECOMMENDATION 3: Direct the City Manager to Work with the Measure U Committee on Providing Metrics on the Performance of Measure U Funded Programs RECOMMENDATION 1: Align FY2024/25 Spending with Community Priorities The Committee surveyed its members on 10 policy areas for prioritization. A strong consensus on two areas of spending emerged. The Committee recommends that the City Council prioritize addressing affordable housing and homelessness in its Measure U spending.
These priorities align with the recent City Auditor’s Community Survey of Sacramento residents.1 In that survey, Sacramento residents were asked to prioritize categories of Measure U spending. Respondents rated affordable housing and homeless supportive services as the top concern, with 70% rating it a high priority, and another 14% rating it a medium priority.
Prioritizing affordable housing and homelessness are timely and in line with a central message voters were given for approving Measure U.2 In the argument in favor of the measure, Mayor Steinberg stated that the measure would provide funding to address “the homelessness crisis” and provide more affordable housing. These remain critical issues for the city to prioritize. In the last ten years, the number of people who are homeless in the county has increased by 266%.3 The high costs of homes and rent are prime contributors to the increase in homelessness. Rents have increased significantly over the last decade4 and Sacramento is now one of the most costly places to live in the country.5 While the City has significantly increased its spending on homelessness in recent years, the increasing housing costs and increasing number of unhoused people make clear that more resources are needed.
Increasing spending on affordable housing is key to preventing homelessness, and is urgently needed to address the humanitarian crisis our community is experiencing. This should include more investment in building affordable housing and in strategies to prevent people from becoming homeless. We urge the City Council to make the high cost of housing and homelessness the top priorities for the City this year.
RECOMMENDATION 2: Allocate $1,000,000 to Fund a New Round of Participatory Budgeting Last year, the Committee reported to the City Council on the progress and evaluation of Sacramento’s first participatory budgeting experiment. The Committee is very pleased with the initial findings and results, as well as the lessons learned from the pilot. As you saw in the evaluation from Third Plateau, the experiment met its initial goals. It found:
“Overall, the pilot process made headway against its targeted short-term outcomes, and was a source of much learning for participants at all levels. Moreover, while the challenges facing the pilot diminished its
1 Sacramento CA National Community Survey, National Research Center at Polco (Feb 2024). Available at:
https://sacramento.granicus.com/MetaViewer.php?view_id=21&event_id=4954&meta_id=767186. 2 In the argument in favor, Mayor Steinberg wrote “Sacramento’s homelessness crisis is a growing problem we see every day. With Measure U we can provide housing and supportive services, including mental health care and substance abuse treatment to help the homeless get back on their feet and off the street s for good.
Measure U can also provide funding for more affordable housing, increasing the supply of housing that young people, seniors and middle class families can afford.” See Argument in Favor of Measure U, available at:
https://sacramento.granicus.com/MetaViewer.php?view_id=59&clip_id=5713&meta_id=751722 . 3 See: CoC Homeless Populations and Subpopulations Reports. Available at:
https://www.hudexchange.info/programs/coc/coc-homeless-populations-and-subpopulations-reports/. 4 For example, see: “Thirty percent of Sacramentans told Census they’re spending half their income on rent,” Sacramento News and Review (Jan 2, 2024). Available at:
https://sacramento.newsreview.com/2024/01/02/thirty-percent-of-sacramentans-told-census-theyre-spending- half-their-income-on-rent/.
5 For example, see: “Sacramento one of US cities that needs ‘most wealth to live comfortably,’ US News says”, Sacramento Bee (Oct 24, 2023). Available at: https://www.sacbee.com/news/business/article280933358.html.
overall impact, the process generated ideas for how to improve neighborhoods and engaged well over 1,000 residents in the process of idea collection, voting and serving as proposal delegates.” The goals of engaging residents, increasing the City’s knowledge of residents, and the advancement of equity were all found to have shown progress toward those objectives.
Table from pg 44 of Third Plateau’s City of Sacramento Participatory Budgeting Evaluation Report6 We acknowledge that the positive results from the initial pilot are preliminary, given that the grants have not been completed. The Committee plans to continue to monitor the results of the participatory budgeting pilot and will update the City Council on those results. However, it is critical that the city not lose momentum, or the institutional memory of Committee members, city staff, and community members who worked on the initial pilot. It is more important than ever for residents to be involved with the decision making on where resources are needed, and to improve their trust in their government.
We therefore request a budget allocation for participatory budgeting in the FY24/25 budget for $1 million for grants, as well as funds to evaluate implementation again.
Finally, we note that Third Plateau recommended institutionalizing participatory budgeting. Consistent with its responsibilities, the Committee would be pleased to work with City staff on this effort.7 We
6 City of Sacramento Participatory Budgeting Evaluation Report, Third Plateau (Jan 2023). Available at:
https://www.cityofsacramento.gov/content/dam/portal/cmo/participatory - budgeting/Participatory%20Budgeting%20Pilot%20Program%20Evaluation%20Report%20FINAL%20v1 -26- 2023.pdf.
7 The City Council resolution establishing the Measure U Advisory Committee stated that the purpose of the Committee was to ensure “resources reflect Council and community priorities.” The Committee was charged with making “recommendations on revenue and expenditures of certain funds” from Measure U. The resolution made it the power and duty of the committee to “[w]ork with City staff on community engagement” and to “support inclusive community economic development.” For all of these reasons, it falls within the Committee’s prerogative to recommend to the City Council to renew its investment in participatory budgeting and to be involved in implementation.
believe Measure U Advisory Committee members should continue to play a key role in any new participatory budgeting process, given the Committee’s experience, commitment, and responsibilities.
RECOMMENDATION 3: Direct the City Manager to Work with the Measure U Committee on Providing Metrics on the Performance of Measure U Funded Programs One of the powers and duties of the Measure U Community Advisory Committee includes “[r]eview of performance measures and evaluation of city expenditures.” In the ballot argument made by Mayor Steinberg, voters were told that “Measure U includes tough accountability, requiring annual independent financial audits and public review of expenditures. These strong fiscal safeguards will ensure that Measure U funds are used efficiently, effectively, and for the benefit of Sacramento.” (Emphasis added).
Since the Committee was established, it has been seeking improved data from the city to fulfill its role in evaluating Measure U spending. For example, last year, the Committee requested “greater data transparency related to Measure U expenditures, including the availability of Measure U funding allocations, tracking measurable outcomes and program effectiveness, and a district-by-district evaluation of Measure U spending.” The Committee renews this request.
We understand the challenges providing this data may pose, and that there is a great degree of nuance and variety in the metrics that are used to track outcomes. We therefore request the City Manager and staff work with the Committee on identifying sources that will meet our needs.
Without metrics on the performance of Measure U funded programs the Committee cannot evaluate the effectiveness of Measure U spending, as intended. The presentations we have received from Measure U funded programs have been excellent. But we still need substantially more data to meaningfully fulfill the oversight role that voters were told the Committee would play.
Currently, the Committee receives short descriptions of spending of millions of dollars in a “Measure U Budget Dashboard.” We are very grateful that the City Manager’s staff put this together for us, as it is an invaluable resource. But the Committee continues to believe we need more and better objective impact metrics to understand how well programs are actually functioning and what their human impact is. We would like to understand what the key performance indicators of the different programs are, and whether those programs are meeting those indicators.
For example, at the Committee’s March 18th meeting, staff from the City’s Community Engagement Team presented to the Committee on its work. Committee members were deeply impressed with the dedication, innovation, and success of this team. Yet the description we have for this program in our materials do not do the program any justice. Our Dashboard on Measure U spending tells us “[t]he Community Engagement team continues to manage the city’s volunteer service/internship program and financial empowerment center.” We had no idea the volunteer program had overseen more than 8,000 volunteers who committed 83,000 volunteer hours. And that description does not show us that the Financial Empowerment Center had served 1,200 clients and helped them save more than $500,000, or that it had initiated a guaranteed income pilot.
These types of indicators, and others we have seen in presentations to the Committee and the City Council, would be valuable for the Committee to understand the human impact of Measure U funded
programs. Additionally, to the extent the programs can further breakdown this data with race/ethnicity, geography, income, or other data on recipients would be helpful to us for evaluating impact.
Attached to this letter as Addendum 1 are additional comments from Committee members on specific proposed spending priorities and the projected budget deficit. Please note that once we see the City Manager's budget, we will update these recommendations for your consideration before the Council's adoption of the final budget. Thank you for considering these recommendations and for the opportunity to serve our community.
Sincerely,
The Measure U Community Advisory Committee
Addendum 1
Committee members cited the following specific projects and programs as high priority:
● Affordable home ownership programs Grants for rent/mortgage Financial/budgeting programs. ● PB should remain a priority as this time as it’s one of the most Visible programs of Measure U and recommits it purpose to community. In addition, measure U funds should be steered towards putting a dent into the housing crisis and affordable housing in our city. ● Funding and tax incentives that will encourage housing production along commercial corridors like Stockton and Del Paso Blvd. This in of itself will spur new economic growth from new and existing businesses.
● Affordable housing & homelessness: tiny homes and support DCR: less temporary shelter, more permanent ground, and continue keeping streets clean.
● Given the data that three people become homeless for everyone who is moved from unhoused > housed locally, PREVENTION strategies are immediate and necessary. HUD describes prevention as including "short-term and medium-term tenant-based or project-based rental assistance, rental arrears, rental application fees, security deposits, advance payment of last month's rent, utility deposits and payments, moving costs, housing search and placement, housing stability case management, mediation, legal services, and credit repair. ● Affordable Housing: Expand and raise profile of programs to prevent people from becoming homeless Community Response: Fully fund authorized positions. ● When Measure U was introduced to voters, the purpose was to focus on restoring and protecting police and fire services, park maintenance, and other essential City services. I want to ensure the money generated from Measure U continues to be used with our communities in mind.
1. Community Investment: - Community Centers and Spaces: Continue to invest in the development and enhancement of community centers, parks, and public spaces that foster community engagement, cultural activities, and recreational programs. - Small Business Support: Create programs to provide financial assistance, training, and resources to local entrepreneurs, promoting economic growth within the community.
2. Public Safety: - Community Policing: Invest in community policing strategies that build positive relationships between law enforcement and residents, fostering trust and collaboration. - Crime Prevention Programs: Support initiatives focused on crime prevention through community outreach, education, and intervention programs. - Emergency Response Services: Enhance emergency response capabilities by investing in modern equipment, training programs, and technology to ensure a prompt and effective response to public safety incidents. - Fire Safety: Invest in our fire so they have the resources to handle the increases in fire incidences caused by our unhoused individuals.
3. Youth: - After-School Programs: Invest in more after-school programs, especially in lower-income communities. - Youth Employment Programs: Continue to invest in programs like the Landscape and Learning Program which give youth in Sacramento opportunities to earn money. These programs also have an underlying theme of professional development.
● Homelessness - I support using funding for homeless housing initiatives and the office of homelessness services. The initiatives outlined in the 2023 expenditures seem to be on the right track. Affordable Housing - I support using funding for zoning updates to streamline and simplify the construction of affordable housing. Public Safety - I support using funding to recruit diverse and qualified officers for Sacramento PD.
● Northgate Business facade program; The Taco Plaza; the Arts and Garden Center; Gardenland Park play structure and picnic tables, 2 Northgate Murals.
Members provided the following comments when asked about the City’s projected budget deficit:
● Must stress my continued support for PB. Once we cease any funding to it, would be almost impossible to get back.
● Temporary hiring freeze for all administrative positions. ● Reduce the police recruiting budget and ban overtime. Split up responsibilities of police to compensate by handling more calls by DCR and others.
● Principles:
1. Effectiveness Given the scarcity of funding for critical priorities, Measure U funds should NOT be used in ways that are counterproductive or actually increase taxpayer costs related to homelessness. See this Sacramento Bee column from medical doctors serving the homeless population, which cites important data on how stripping unhoused people of their belongings, including medication, is an inefficient and harmful waste of resources. https://www.sacbee.com/opinion/op-ed/article280416184.html
2. Researched based Given the scarcity, Measure U funds should support *researched- based* strategies (see this study from leading homelessness expert in CA, Dr. Kushel @UCSF who finds, “The bottom line is that even really high-risk folks can be housed” with the right approach.
3. Responsive & Equitable Consistent with our goals around participatory budgeting, the people affected by decisions must be involved in the decision making. ● Services for homeless should be the top priority.
● Protect existing jobs Protect investments in programs, people and places focused on ‘left behind neighborhoods’ Develop ‘impact’ metrics instead of or in addition to ‘activity’ metrics. ● We need to support things that are tangible with real data for success. ● Prioritizing essential services is going to be key to managing the City's deficit. It is expected that there will be a reduction in Measure U spending, but we must not lose sight of the purpose and intent of Measure U. Community investment and public safety programs must remain the priority of Measure U spending.
● We should focus on implementing the immediate priorities of Sacramentans and the voters. We should focus on basic services, public safety, homelessness. I would be willing to make smart reductions in climate investments, the library, and arts programming at this difficult financial time.
● I believe that the Measure U monies should not be utilized to offset the deficit.