Broadway Project
Gillian Hayes – Assistant City
Manager
Natalie Peterson – Interim
Assistant to the City Manager
Overview
1. Background on the Project
2. Site Plans and Timeline
3. Program Plan
4. Next Steps
Partners
• Firm Foundation
• Factory OS
• Shelter INC.
Homekey Background
• September 9, 2021- HCD announced Homekey Round
2 NOFA
• January 25, 2022 – City adopted resolution to apply for Homekey
• January 31, 2022 – City submitted application
• May 10, 2022 – City received acceptance letter
Development
Firm Foundations
• Located at: APN-0067-140-150 on .53-acre site – in the North Gateway District
• Currently undeveloped vacant land
• APN is zoned in North Gateway District for 50
residential units per acre.
– After apply 80% density bonus per CA Density Bonus
Law that makes the parcel eligible for 48 units
proposed (27 units per acre + 80% or 21 units)
• PSH is permitted use per City of Vallejo Municipal Code table 16.301.A
Development
Firm Foundations
• 47 units of Permanent Supportive Housing (PSH) for
most vulnerable residents in Vallejo
• Provides: 1 manager unit, community gathering space,
laundry facility, office space, outdoor gathering space, and rooftop deck
Construction
Firm Foundations
• Cost of construction per unit: $340,000
– Significantly lower than average cost of construction for affordable housing units in the Bay Area of
$640,000 (per CA Tax Credit Allocation Committee)
Development Milestones
Firm Foundations
• 6/10/22 – Planning Application Submitted
• 6/29/22 – Module Production
• 7/1/22 – Building Permit Application Submitted
• 7/15/22 – Planning Department Approval Anticipated
• 7/29/22 – Modules Complete
• 8/15/22 – Building Permits Anticipated
• 9/1/22 – Construction Begins
• 12/1/22 – Modular Installation
• 12/8/22 – Post-Mod Construction
• 1/10/23 – Receive Temporary Certificate of Occupancy & Residents move in
• Finish exterior or building, landscaping & non-life saving projects
• 3/10/23 – Certificate of Occupancy and Construction Close- out
Project Renderings
Factory OS
A Housing Production Company
Mission: Make Homes More Affordable
• Reducing Cost
• Reducing Time
• Building With Greater Quality
Our Footprint
• 2 Facilities in Northern California
– 400,000sf Under Roof
• 500 Workers
• 1,750 Homes Completed to Date
A Partnership with Labor
Factory OS
Union Partnership
• In-House Training
• Recruitment Support
• Workforce Development (innovation)
Second Chance Workers
• 25% of workforce
• Growing an industry
Factory OS Video
Factory OS
Bottom Line
We Succeed if Our
Workers Succeed
Together Our
Mission is to Build
For Them
Property Management
Shelter INC.
• Onsite property manager – Lives
onsite
• Working with Solano County
Coordinated Entry System
• Management Hours: Monday-
Friday, 1pm-5pm
• Lower barrier housing approach,
Housing First Model
• Experienced in managing
Permanent Supportive Housing
• First level financial management
for property
Resident Services Plan
Shelter INC.
• 3 fulltime case managers on staff
• Offices on site for effective delivery of services
• Outside service coordination
• Life skills classes which include: budgeting, stress
management, computer skills, job training, nutrition,
hygiene, and being a good neighbor
• Public transportation assistance
• Common areas for socialization and group activities
• Self funded which provides greater flexibility in changes to service plan to meet unique needs of the property
Permanent Supportive Housing Narrative
Shelter INC.
Permanent Supportive Housing (PSH) is an evidence-based housing intervention that combines on-going rental assistance with supportive services such as health and mental health care for chronically homeless households. PSH properties are not a shelter environment, they are apartments that the person can reside in without a lease end date. Chronic homelessness clients can be singles, families, and single adults with a child.
The size of the units allows for up to two people to live in to provide stable housing. This population, statistically speaking, also have a lower number of automobiles that need accommodating.
The strategy for this property is unique in its nature as it will be free of debt service after the initial funding has been obtained to build and set up the property for operations. This allows for more flexibility to adjust the services to meet the individual needs of each resident.
Providing for the needs of the residents in the property is the highest priority to be good stewards of the property, service provider for the population, and neighbors to the greater community.
Next Steps
• No Entitlements
• CEQA Exempt
• NEPA
• Building Permits
• Factory OS – building of units
• Completion of project and
opening January 2023
Recommendation
1. Adopt a resolution authorizing the City Manager or his designee to accept the Department of Housing and
Community Development (Department) (HCD) grant
award for Homekey Round 2 in the amount of
$12,091,866
2. Provide Notice of Intent to amend the Capital Grant
and Contribution Fund #221 Fiscal Year 2021-22
Budget to recognize the Homekey grant revenue in the
amount of $12,091,866 and appropriate expenditures
of $12,091,866 during the eligible funding time period
CONTACT(S)
Gillian Hayes, Assistant City
Manager
[email protected]
Natalie Peterson, Inter
[email protected]
ROADS AND
INFRASTRUCTURE
BALLOT MEASURE
WORKSHOP
Terrance Davis
Assistant City Manager
CURRENT VALLEJO ROAD
CONDITIONS
Classification Percentage
of System Avg PCI
Arterial 21.03% 60
Collector 16.67% 55
Residential 62.30% 44
TOTAL 100% 48
PCI = Pavement Condition Index, which provides a
standard for rating road conditions on a scale from
0-100. Solano County’s average PCI is 67.
5 YEAR ROAD CONDITION
FORECAST
• Current Roads Funding: $4M/YR
• 5-Year Outlook: 9 Point drop to
39 PCI in 2026
• $628M in deferred maintenance
VALLEJO PROJECTED ROAD CONDITIONS
VALLEJO CITY FACILITIES
CONDITION INDEX (FCI)
Facility 10-Year
Rating
10-Year
Cost (in M)
JFK Library 24% $12.1
City Hall 30.1% $10.4
Corporation
Yard
22.2% $4.9
111 Amador 49.1% $10.1
TOTAL $37.5
FM3 BALLOT MEASURE SURVEY
RESULTS
PRESENTATION
VALLEJO SALES TAX ALLOCATION
Description Percentage
State General Fund 3.9375%
County Realignment (Mental
Health/Public Welfare/Safety) 1.5625%
Countywide Transportation Fund 0.2500%
Solano County Public Library
Transactions and Use Tax 0.1250%
County Public Safety (Prop 172) 0.5000%
City General Fund (Bradley-
Burns) 1.0000%
Transactions Use Tax (Measure
V) 1.0000%
TOTAL 8.3750%
NOT SUBJECT TO SALES TAX
• Necessities of life: Food, health
related, and housing
• General public benefit: Alternate
energy, Museum, Public art
exhibits, nonprofit, religious and
educational organizations
• Industry benefit: Transportation,
entertainment, petroleum,
manufactured housing and
building, and leasing
• Exclusions: “Sales price”, “Gross
receipts” and transactions not
considered sales or purchases of
tangible personal property
Per CDTFA
GENERAL PURPOSE BALLOT MEASURE
(DRAFT LANGUAGE)
• City of Vallejo Local Road and Essential
Services Measure. To maintain critical city
services, such as repairing, paving, and
maintaining deteriorating local roads, city
buildings, fire protection, code enforcement, and
youth programs; address homelessness; and for
general government use shall the City of Vallejo
adopt a measure establishing a 0.875% sales tax,
providing $18,000,000 annually until ended by
voters, requiring yearly audits, citizen oversight,
and all funds legally required to be spent locally?
SALES TAX RATE
COMPARISONS
City Name Sales Tax Rate
Concord 9.75%
Martinez 9.75%
Pleasant Hill 9.25%
Vacaville 8.125%
Benicia 8.375%
American Canyon 7.75%
Vallejo (Current) 8.375%
Vallejo (Proposed) 9.25%
POTENTIAL CITY SERVICE
USES OF GENERAL TAX
REVENUE
• 0.875% tax estimated to generate $18
million annually; $500 million over 25
years
• Could fund local investment in:
– Road repair, paving, and
maintenance
– City building repairs, renovations,
and modernizations
– Code enforcement
– Enhanced homelessness services
– Youth programs
NEXT STEPS FOR
NOVEMBER 2022 BALLOT
Step 1: Direct staff to return on July 12 for introduction of an Ordinance
Step 2: Adopt Ordinance and Resolutions on July 26
– Identifying members of the City Council who might
author arguments for or against the measure, and
direct the City Attorney to draft an impartial analysis – Calling and ordering submission of the Ordinance to
the qualified electors (includes ballot language)
– Argument Rebuttals
Step 3: Submit resolutions of ballot measure to Solano
County by August 12, 2022
CONTACT(S)
Terrance Davis
[email protected]
Vallejo Voter Attitudes
Toward Potential
Finance Measures
Key Findings of a Citywide Survey
Conducted May 19-26, 2022
220-6345
2 Dates May 19-26, 2022
Survey Type Dual-mode Voter Survey
Research Population Likely November 2022 Voters in the City of Vallejo Total Interviews 564
Margin of Sampling Error ±4.9% at the 95% Confidence Level (Full Sample) ±6.9% at the 95% Confidence Level (Half Sample)
Contact Methods
Data Collection Modes
Languages English, Spanish and Tagalog
(Note: Not All Results Will Sum to 100% Due to Rounding) Survey Specifics and Methodology
Text
Invitations
Telephone
Calls
Email
Invitations
Telephone
Interviews
Online
Interviews
3 Views of Life in
Vallejo
4 *Tracked from a Community Survey; Wording Slightly Different in Previous Survey 11%
14%
40%
37%
42%
8%
16%
29%
45%
44%
32%
43%
18%
8%
18%
17%
44%
42%
28%
20%
40%
84%
67%
54%
2022
2020
2019
*2018
2016
2010
2009
2007
Right Direction Have Not Changed Much/Don't Know Wrong Direction Would you say that things in the City of Vallejo have been moving in the right direction, in the wrong direction, or have not changed much over the last 2 years? Pessimists about Vallejo’s direction
outnumber optimists four to one, though
still at nowhere near the levels of 2010.
July
2020
5 Total
Fav.
Total
Unfav.
14% 60%
14% 67%
I would like to ask your impressions of some organizations in public life. Please tell me whether your impression of that organization is generally favorable or unfavorable. 11%
12%
33%
34%
27%
33%
19%
14%
7%
5%
The Vallejo City Council
Vallejo City government,
overall
Very Fav. Smwt. Fav. Smwt. Unfav. Very Unfav. HO/Can't Rate NHO/Don't Know Few respondents expressed favorable
opinions of city government...
6 I would like to ask your impressions of some organizations in public life. Please tell me whether your impression of that organization is generally favorable or unfavorable. *Tracked from a Community Survey
Organization *2018 2020 2022 Difference
(2020-2022)
Vallejo City
government, overall 34% 28% 14% -14%
(Total Favorable)
…views that have declined in recent years.
7 Ext./Very
Ser. Prob.
80%
79%
79%
75%
69%
68%
68%
50%
52%
50%
45%
42%
39%
35%
30%
27%
29%
29%
27%
29%
33%
14%
10%
17%
19%
21%
17%
18%
7%
6%
7%
11%
12%
Homelessness
Crime, gangs, and drugs
Public dumping and trash
^A lack of community safety
The condition of local streets
and roads
The quality of City of Vallejo
public safety services
The City’s financial stability
Ext. Ser. Prob. Very Ser. Prob. Smwt. Ser. Prob. Not Too Ser. Prob. Don't Know Top concerns focused on homelessness, public
dumping, and issues related to public safety.
^Not Part of Split Sample
I'd like to read you some problems facing the City of Vallejo that other people have mentioned. Please tell me whether you think it is an extremely serious problem, a very serious problem, somewhat serious problem, or not too serious a problem in Vallejo. 8 Ext./Very
Ser. Prob.
65%
64%
63%
59%
59%
55%
54%
36%
33%
34%
29%
25%
29%
37%
29%
31%
29%
31%
33%
26%
17%
18%
23%
17%
27%
25%
28%
18%
10%
10%
5%
6%
8%
12%
16%
6%
15%
7%
8%
5%
12%
Too little growth and
development
The cost of living
Waste and inefficiency in
city government
The quality of Vallejo’s
public infrastructure
Jobs and the local economy
The cost of housing
^Excessive use of force towards
unarmed people
Ext. Ser. Prob. Very Ser. Prob. Smwt. Ser. Prob. Not Too Ser. Prob. Don't Know The cost of living, government waste, and
public infrastructure are second-tier concerns.
I'd like to read you some problems facing the City of Vallejo that other people have mentioned. Please tell me whether you think it is an extremely serious problem, a very serious problem, somewhat serious problem, or not too serious a problem in Vallejo. ^Not Part of Split Sample 9 Ext./Very
Ser. Prob.
49%
42%
38%
35%
31%
17%
9%
18%
18%
17%
19%
12%
10%
31%
24%
21%
16%
18%
7%
5%
32%
34%
28%
23%
29%
36%
14%
13%
23%
27%
13%
24%
46%
65%
6%
7%
28%
17%
12%
^The economic impacts of the
coronavirus outbreak
Bike, pedestrian and
road safety
^The health impacts of the
coronavirus outbreak
The burden of public
employee pensions
The amount people pay in
City taxes
Traffic and congestion
Too much growth
and development
Ext. Ser. Prob. Very Ser. Prob. Smwt. Ser. Prob. Not Too Ser. Prob. Don't Know Concerns are low about city traffic and congestion;
majorities do not think growth and development is a
serious problem.
I'd like to read you some problems facing the City of Vallejo that other people have mentioned. Please tell me whether you think it is an extremely serious problem, a very serious problem, somewhat serious problem, or not too serious a problem in Vallejo. ^Not Part of Split Sample 10 Problem 2009 2010 2016 *2018 2019 2020 2022 Difference (2020-2022)
The cost of living -- -- -- 42% 49% 40% 64% +24%
^A lack of community safety -- -- -- -- -- 58% 75% +17% The quality of City of Vallejo
public safety services -- 55% 47% 53% 52% 57% 68% +11%
Crime, gangs, and drugs -- 82% 74% 76% 63% 69% 79% +10% The City’s financial stability -- -- -- 56% 60% 59% 68% +9% The quality of Vallejo’s
public infrastructure -- -- -- -- 50% 53% 59% +6%
The cost of housing -- -- 41% 46% 48% 50% 55% +5%
Homelessness -- -- -- -- -- 77% 80% +3%
Waste and inefficiency in
city government 65% 74% 48% 49% 47% 61% 63% +2%
Traffic and congestion -- -- -- 23% 22% 16% 17% +1%
(Extremely/Very Serious Problem)
Concerns about the cost of living and community
safety have increased notably since 2020.
I'd like to read you some problems facing the City of Vallejo that other people have mentioned. Please tell me whether you think it is an extremely serious problem, a very serious problem, somewhat serious problem, or not too serious a problem in Vallejo. ^Not Part of Split Sample *Tracked from a Community Survey
11 *Tracked from a Community Survey
In your personal opinion, do you think there is a great need, some need, a little need, or no real need for additional funds to provide the level of City services that Vallejo residents need and want? 46%
61%
48%
44%
24%
20%
34%
32%
10%
6%
5%
11%
8%
7%
10%
6%
11%
6%
7%
2022
2020
2019
*2018
Great Need Some Need A Little Need No Real Need Don’t Know Great/ Some
Need
A Little/
No Real
Need
71% 18%
81% 13%
82% 15%
76% 16%
While majorities expressed a gut feeling that
the City needs additional funding, that perception
is less strongly held than it was in prior years.
12 Initial Reactions
to a Potential
Funding Measure
13 Measures Assessed in this Survey
• All survey respondents were asked how they would vote on two hypothetical
0.875% sales tax measures.
▪ One would dedicate funds exclusively for streets and roads (two-thirds vote threshold).
▪ One would provide fund for the City’s general fund (majority vote threshold). • Measures were rotated in the initial vote to mitigate against any bias associated with the order in which they were heard or read.
• Respondents were also asked to react to a variety of ways that funds generated by either measure could be spent.
• Later in the survey, respondents were presented with a set of statements supporting, and then a set of statement criticizing, the measure they heard or read first.
• Respondents were asked how they would vote on the measure after being presented with each set of statements to determine hypothetical ceilings and floors of support.
14 Hypothetical Special-Purpose
Measure Language
Do you think you would vote “yes” or “no” on this measure? City of Vallejo Safe Streets and Pothole Repair Measure.
To maintain/improve local roads, sidewalks, and neighborhood/ residential streets, provide safe routes to school;
repair potholes/streets/crumbling sidewalks and prevent future deterioration; and enhance senior/disabled accessibility shall the City of Vallejo adopt a measure establishing a 0.875% sales tax, providing $18,000,000 annually until ended by voters, requiring yearly audits, independent citizen oversight, and all funds legally required to be spent locally only on Vallejo streets and not for any other purpose?
(Reviewed by the City Attorney; two-thirds vote threshold for passage) 15 37%
38%
38%
27%
23%
25%
7%
5%
11%
9%
10%
15%
19%
17%
Asked First
Asked Second
Total
Def. Yes Prob. Yes Und., Lean Yes Undecided Und., Lean No Prob. No Def. No Total Yes
Total
No
69% 29%
64% 29%
66% 29%
Initial reactions to the special-purpose
measure funding streets and roads were
near its two-thirds vote threshold but within the
margin of error.
Do you think you would vote “yes” or “no” on this measure? 16 Hypothetical General-Purpose
Measure Language
Do you think you would vote “yes” or “no” on this measure? City of Vallejo Fiscal Stability and Essential Services Measure.
To maintain critical city services, such as fire protection, emergency medical response, crime prevention/investigation, street maintenance, and youth programs; address homelessness; enhance police transparency/accountability and recruit/retain qualified police officers; and for general government use shall the City of Vallejo adopt a measure establishing a 0.875% sales tax, providing $18,000,000 annually until ended by voters, requiring yearly audits, citizen oversight, and all funds legally required to be spent locally?
(Reviewed by the City Attorney; majority vote threshold for passage) 17 30%
38%
34%
18%
18%
18%
5%
7%
6%
7%
7%
7%
12%
7%
9%
25%
21%
23%
Asked First
Asked Second
Total
Def. Yes Prob. Yes Und., Lean Yes Undecided Und., Lean No Prob. No Def. No Total Yes
Total
No
53% 40%
63% 30%
58% 35%
Initial reactions to the general-purpose measure
were above it’s majority vote threshold.
Do you think you would vote “yes” or “no” on this measure? 18 Ext./Very
Impt.
92%
91%
88%
86%
85%
85%
85%
^Not Part of Split Sample
52%
54%
53%
62%
55%
53%
46%
40%
37%
35%
24%
30%
32%
39%
7%
7%
10%
9%
10%
13%
13%
Keeping public places healthy, safe,
and clean
Maintaining fire protection and
emergency medical response services
^Attracting and retaining businesses
and jobs in the City
Addressing homelessness
Maintaining crime prevention and
investigation services
Preventing dumping and blight
Repairing streets to prevent damage
to cars and trucks
Ext. Impt. Very Impt. Smwt. Impt. Not Impt. Don't Know
Support was particularly intense
for addressing homelessness.
I am going to read you a list of specific City projects and services that could be funded if the City had additional revenue, either from a ballot measure like the ones we have discussed or from any other source. Please tell me how important each one is to you: extremely important, very important, somewhat important, or not important.
19 Ext./Very
Impt.
85%
83%
82%
81%
81%
81%
80%
I am going to read you a list of specific City projects and services that could be funded if the City had additional revenue, either from a ballot measure like the ones we have discussed or from any other source. Please tell me how important each one is to you: extremely important, very important, somewhat important, or not important. ^Not Part of Split Sample 37%
40%
45%
48%
46%
44%
44%
48%
43%
37%
33%
34%
37%
36%
12%
14%
13%
12%
14%
13%
17%
5%
Maintaining streets and roads to
prevent future deterioration
Repairing neighborhood streets
Maintaining the City’s fiscal stability
^Providing safe routes to school
for children
Repairing the conditions of local
streets, roads, and sidewalks
Repairing streets officially designated
as “failed” by independent experts
Resurfacing deteriorated streets
Ext. Impt. Very Impt. Smwt. Impt. Not Impt. Don't Know
Respondents prioritized a variety of ways funds
could be spent to improve roads at similar levels.
20 Ext./Very
Impt.
79%
78%
78%
76%
75%
75%
74%
I am going to read you a list of specific City projects and services that could be funded if the City had additional revenue, either from a ballot measure like the ones we have discussed or from any other source. Please tell me how important each one is to you: extremely important, very important, somewhat important, or not important. Split Sample
56%
52%
46%
55%
44%
38%
43%
23%
26%
33%
21%
30%
38%
31%
13%
13%
18%
13%
16%
19%
21%
5%
6%
9%
8%
Enhancing police transparency
and accountability
Maintaining anti-gang and
anti-drug programs
Repairing potholes
Recruiting and retaining qualified
police officers
Providing a navigation center where
people experiencing homelessness
can access services
Maintaining community health
programs and services
Improving local streets, roads,
and sidewalks
Ext. Impt. Very Impt. Smwt. Impt. Not Impt. Don't Know
Many other public safety, roads, and community
services were also seen as important.
21 Ext./Very
Impt.
74%
69%
69%
68%
67%
67%
66%
I am going to read you a list of specific City projects and services that could be funded if the City had additional revenue, either from a ballot measure like the ones we have discussed or from any other source. Please tell me how important each one is to you: extremely important, very important, somewhat important, or not important. ^Not Part of Split Sample 39%
36%
35%
33%
31%
26%
38%
35%
33%
34%
35%
37%
41%
28%
20%
22%
23%
18%
26%
23%
25%
5%
6%
6%
6%
5%
8%
7%
8%
Repairing crumbling sidewalks
Enhancing safety and access for
emergency response vehicles
Preparing for natural disasters and
public health emergencies
^Requiring independent
citizen oversight
Enhancing safety for pedestrians,
bicyclists and drivers
Improving pedestrian, bicyclist, and
driver safety
Rebuilding cracked and
deteriorating sidewalks
Ext. Impt. Very Impt. Smwt. Impt. Not Impt. Don't Know
Improvements for bicycling and
sidewalks were also seen as important by
many, but to a slightly lesser degree.
22 Ext./Very
Impt.
66%
65%
55%
49%
40%
32%
32%
I am going to read you a list of specific City projects and services that could be funded if the City had additional revenue, either from a ballot measure like the ones we have discussed or from any other source. Please tell me how important each one is to you: extremely important, very important, somewhat important, or not important. Split Sample
32%
31%
23%
27%
16%
16%
15%
34%
34%
31%
21%
23%
15%
17%
24%
26%
34%
27%
37%
25%
34%
6%
5%
11%
23%
20%
35%
26%
8%
8%
Enhancing senior and disabled access
Improving sidewalks to make
them more accessible to people
with disabilities
Maintaining public landscaping,
including street medians
Providing a safe, modern
police station
Reducing traffic
Replacing the old, out-of-date
police station
Improving commute times
Ext. Impt. Very Impt. Smwt. Impt. Not Impt. Don't Know
Addressing traffic and the old police station are not
viewed as very or extremely important by a majority
of respondents.
23 The Impact of
Additional
Information
24 Positive and Negative Statements
• Possible positive statements included quantifying road repair needs; highlighting the experience of driving on Vallejo’s streets; noting the relationship between increased 911 response times and closed fire stations; noting that funds could support keeping public places clean and safe, youth programs, improved disability access, providing safe routes to schools, implementing police reforms, operating the new homeless navigation center, and modernizing the unsafe police station; and that funds would be subject to various accountability provisions. • Possible negative statements included that the gas tax should already pay for road repairs; that Vallejo voters have tax fatigue; that sales taxes are regressive; that the City has demonstrated poor financial management and should spend funds more efficiently; that the high cost of living and inflation make higher taxes even more untenable; that they City spends too much on claims against the Police Department and on employee pensions; that a special purpose measure only on roads would generate opposition given the City’s public safety needs. 25 Do you think you would vote “yes” or “no” on this measure? 69% 66%
47%
29% 27% 42%
3% 7% 11%
Initial Vote After Positives After Negatives
Total Yes
Total No
Undecided
Support for the special-purpose roads measure
did not increase after positive statements and fell
well below the threshold after negative statements.
Road Repair Measure (two-thirds vote threshold)
41% without
those
“leaning yes”
26 Do you think you would vote “yes” or “no” on this measure? 53% 57%
50%
40%
34%
38%
7% 9% 12%
Initial Vote After Positives After Negatives
Total Yes
Total No
Undecided
Support for the general-purpose measure
did go up slightly after positive statements but fell to 50% after negative statements.
General-Purpose Measure (majority vote threshold)
43% without
those
“leaning yes”
27 Conclusions
28 Views of Life in Vallejo
• After rebounding in the latter part of the prior decade, views of life in Vallejo and of City government are at their lowest levels since the Great Recession and Vallejo’s
bankruptcy.
• Concerns about homelessness, public dumping, and public safety are particularly acute.
• There is also strong sentiment that local street conditions are poor and many are not confident in the City’s financial management.
• However, majorities also believe the City needs additional funding for services.
29 Ballot Measure Viability
• Initial support for a potential special-purpose sales tax measure funding roads was at its two-thirds vote threshold but within the margin of error.
Negative arguments dropped that support significantly below 50%. • Initial support for a potential general-purpose sales tax measure was slightly above its majority vote threshold, though it fell to 50% after critical statements, relying upon a notable number of very tentative supporters to hold at that level in addition to factoring in a margin of error of 6.9%. • Voters see a need for funding, but misgivings about the City’s management and the cost of living suggest that voters are not committed in their support and may easily be convinced to oppose a measure. • While these results are only a snapshot in time and cannot predict the future, they do indicate that a two-thirds measure is not viable this November and a majority vote measure would likely fail.
For more information,
contact:
1999 Harrison St., Suite 2020
Oakland, CA 94612
Phone (510) 451-9521
Fax (510) 451-0384
Curt Below
[email protected]
Lucia Del Puppo
[email protected]
Planning & Development
Services Department
and
Economic Development
Division
May 2022 Update
• Gillian Hayes, Assistant City Manager
• Christina Ratcliffe, AICP, Planning &
Development Services Director
• Paul Kelley, Special Advisor to the City
Manager, Economic Development Manager
PDS:
What Happened in Q-3?
• Residential and Commercial
Projects moving forward…
A
B
C D
Eden Housing: 2118
Sacramento
Longshore Cove: 201 Main
A
B
C
Building Planning
Q3 FY 18-19 842 115
Q3 FY 19-20 918 57
Q3 FY 20-21 907 92
Q3 FY 21-22 935 77
842
115
918
57 907
92 935
77 0
100
200
300
400
500
600
700
800
900
1000
Q3 FY 18-19 Q3 FY 19-20 Q3 FY 20-21 Q3 FY 21-22
Quarter 3 Building & Planning Permit
Comparison
Fiscal Year Building & Planning Revenue
Comparison as of 03/31/2022
Fiscal Year ADU Application Comparison as of
03/31/2022
ADU Applications
FY 18-19 39
FY 19-20 35
FY 20-21 78
FY 21-22 51
39 35
78 51
0 10
20 30
40 50
60 70
80 90
FY 18-19 FY 19-20 FY 20-21 FY 21-22
Looking Ahead:
3 Element Update
Housing, Safety,
Environmental Justice
Looking Ahead: Sonoma
and Magazine Market rate
Apartments
Looking ahead: Solano 360
Specific Plan Update
Planning and Development
Services
On-going work
• Process Planning and Building
Permits
• Zoning Code Clean-up
• New Permitting Software
• Building Code Update
• Retain, Increase, and Train Staff
• Dwelling Unit discretionary
permits being processed now:
1, 330.
• Dwelling Units in Preliminary
Review now: 811
Economic Development
Division
• Paul Kelley, Special Advisor to the
City Manager, Economic
Development Manager
Economic Development 2022
• North Mare Island Disp. & Dev Agreement
• Waterfront Update
• Solano 360
• Economic Development ARPA Funds
– Small business Grants
– Strategic Plan
• Staff and Commissions
Economic Development 2022
• NMI DDA
– Approved March 2022
– Signed May 24th and Recorded
– Escrow open
– Due Diligence – till Mid 2022
– Planner on Board and start on
• Building Removal / Beautification started
• Specific Plan
• Connolly Corridor planning
– Close/Transfer Q3 2022
Connelly Corridor
Economic Development 2022
• Waterfront
– Northern – applications/map/deadline ('22)
– Central – Cleared Title and next steps
– Southern
• PGE Clean up – Commence 21/22
• Visioning ‘23
• Complete 25/26
Southern Waterfront -
Cleanup
Southern Waterfront -
Cleanup
Southern Waterfront – Cleanup /
Restored small properties
Economic Development 2022
• Solano 360
– Coordination
– Contract Planner – County funded
– Entitlements 2022/23 Construction 23/24
• ED/PDS Coordination
• Preliminary proposed:
Economic Development 2022
• ARPA Funds Implementation
– Small Business Pandemic Recovery Grant - $350K
– Marketing May/June
– Applications June/July
– Awards July
• Restaurant Resiliency – $100K
– Marketing/Recruitment – May/June
– Agreements and Roll out July/August
– Complete Winter ’22
• Arts Commission – Grants - 2022
Economic Development 2022
• ARPA Funds Implementation (Cont)
– Economic Development Strategic Plan –
• Last in 2012
– Council Approval for Contract with Dr. Eyler
– Sub – consultants / Data start / meetings
– June/July – start
– Stakeholders
– EVC Work Plan item and Interaction
– Fall/Winter plan drafts and Q1 2023 adoption
Economic Development 2022
• Staff On Boarding
• Grants and Admin
– EPA Brownfields $600K
• Schedule
– EDA Grant: Mare Island Infrastructure
Assessment $960K of $1.5 mil project
• RFP Mid 2022; Award Fall 22
• Complete ’23
• Fairview/Costco
• Commissions – EVC Work Plan implementation
CONTACT(S)
Gillian Hayes, Assistant City Manager
[email protected]
Christina Ratcliffe, AICP, Planning & Development
Services Director
[email protected]
Paul Kelley, Special Advisor to the City Manager,
Economic Development Manager
[email protected]