1996-03-04f
0 ENCINI*S G.H.A.D.
Geologic Hazard Abatement District No. 1
PROPERTY OWNERS INFORMATIONAL MEETING
Monday, March 4, 1996, 7:00 PM
Encinitas City Hall
505 South Vulcan Avenue
CITY COUNCIL CHAMBERS
CALL TO ORDER /ROLL CALL
Chairman Oakley called the meeting to order at 7:01 p.m.
BOARD MEMBERS PRESENT
Robert Frickman, Wanda Fulton, Don Pierce, Gwenn Truax, David
Oakley
ALSO PRESENT
GH.AD Attorney Robert Gaalione, City of Encinitas Asst. City Manager
Jim Benson, Berryman & Henigar Sr. Vice President & Engr., Jeff
Cooper, Joe Francisco, Engr., Warren Diven, Legal Counsel to
Berryman and Henigar
ORAL COMMUNICATIONS: None
AGENDA
1. Assessment District Feasibilitv Study for the Encinitas
Geological Hazard Abatement District #1 (Feb 26 1996)
Chairman Oakley stated that while he had hoped for a larger
audience, he wanted to thank those property owr_ers in attendance
for coming to the meeting. Chairman Oakley acknowledged the North
Countv Time, Beach News, Encinitas Sun and Seacoast Preservation
Association for their notices and bulletins in getting the word out
regarding this meeting. He added that those Board Members who
offered to publish their phone numbers had received a total of five
(5) inquiries related to the meeting.
Chairman Oakley stated that this was to be a information meeting
and no action would be taken tonight. The Board and Consultants
are here to share information and then would like property owner
input.
Chairman Oakley then made a brief statement on the background and
formation of the GH.PD approximately three
years ago following
several substantial bluff failures. The GFIAD currently is made up
of forty properties - two city owned. Chairman Oakley explained
that the California Coastal Commission has jurisdiction over all
properties along the coastline and for the City of Encinitas to ce_
local control they must develop a Local Coastal = Ian to be approved
by the Coastal Commission. The City is preparing a Ccmprehens_-re
=ccal Bluf and Shoreline Plan addressing Biuf= Recession and
Shoreline Erosion - to be completed by Novembe- 16, 1996. Unzi=
tais plan is completed, the GHAD's f unction is not clear.
03/04/96 G.H.A.D.
Page 1
Mtg. #96 -04
• •
The GHAD needs funds to allow administration and in the future
Possibly to construct and maintain seawalls constructed under
California Coastal Commission and City permits, and future walls
within GHAD jurisdiction. The GHAD Board of Directors commissioned
Berryman and Henigar to conduct a Feasibility Study for GHAD to
determine and recommend a mechanism for annual operation
(administration), maintenance of existing seawalls and /or in the
future help homeowners to construct bluff protection improvements.
This meeting is to hear options and recommendations of how to fund
these services and /or improvements. The focus is to learn how much
each benefitted property should be assessed if financed by GRAD.
The Chairman pointed out that the' GHAD is a independent state
agency.
Chairman Oakley asked other Board Members for their comments.
Director Frickman stated his concern that more property owners need
to attend GHAD meetings because this is a costly process that can
and will affect them. The GHAD Board will be making decisions
regarding the assessment process and would like GHAD members to
help them in their decision making.
Director Fulton asked how we might get more people involved - again
because of potential costs.
Director Pierce encouraged those present to listen carefully to
what is said tonight as it affects everyone on the bluffs. He
encouraged folks to read the Feasibility Study document available
in the City Clerk's Office, stating it was well presented.
Director Truax stated to the audience that GHAD Board Members are
approachable and should people have questions or concerns following
the meeting tonight, please call - to help the Board members act.
Chairman Oakley introduced Jeff Cooper, vice President and Sr.
Engineer of Berryman & Henigar, Joe Francisco, Engineer, and Warren
Diven, Legal Counsel on review.
b. Presentation of Preliminary Results. of Berryman & Henigar
Assessment District Feasibility Study. J Cooper J
Francisco, W. Diven
Mr. Cooper provided copies of the Scope of Work - Encinitas GHAD
for Board Members and those in the audience to better enable them
to follow the presentation. He stated at the beginning that they
were open to suggestions. Mr. Cooper stated they had already
worked with the GHAD Board for several months and that this is a
difficult process.
Mr. Cooper stated he'd met with the GHAD Staff to confirm scope of
work, get cost estimates, determine where existing bluff protection
is, what properties do and do not have bluff protection. This data
is summarized in their report. The County Assessor's office was
contacted for parcel information on each property potentially in
03/04/96 G.H.A.D Page 2 Mtg. #96, -04
• •
the CHAD District. A layout was prepared showing existing and
proposed GHAD improvements on the District Boundary Map. A
preliminary assessment spread was done for the cost of improvements
associated with each benefit area and identification of benefit
areas for operation and maintenance costs. Mr. Cooper explained
there would be additional draft revisions following this meeting
and preparation of the final feasibility study based upon input
from GHAD property owners, the GAHD Board and GHAD Legal Counsel.
Warren Diven stated he had served as Special Counsel to the City of
Encinitas with the formation of the GHAD. He reviews alternative
methods of financing both capital improvements, i.e., seawalls, and
maintenance of capital improvements. Mr. Diven stated the GHAD is
a creature of statute, derived from state law, and has the ability
to levy assessments to pay for capital improvements, maintenance
and incidental expenses. However they cannot levy fees and charges
like the City does.
To answer some specific questions, yes, privately owned
improvements can be funded with an assessment district: Previously
built improvements or proposed improvements privately owned can be
operated and maintained with assessment district funds. The GHAD
can use the Municipal Improvements Act of 1913 to form a assessment
district and the Improvement Bond Act of 1915 to issue assessment
district bonds - as well as the 1911 Improvement Act.
Can the GHAD maintain illegally built seawalls, i.e., built without
a permit? Counsel recommends against this unless the owner agrees
to go through the permit process.
The annual cost of operations and maintaining seawalls, etc. within
the GHAD would only be paid by those properties receiving a direct
and special benefit.
Engineer Joe Francisco discussed assessment particulars sharing
diagrams and asking those in attendance to check their parcel
identification for accuracy. Mr. Francisco stated that for this
report, all costs are based on using bonds to finance. There are
other methods. In his cost estimates he reviewed three (3) GHAD
Benefit Zones. Zone 1, the operation costs for the GHAD would be
calculated based on every parcel in the GHAD but levied only
against those with walls, leaving a shortfall for the City to
pickup. Zone 2 is Seawall Maintenance and Zone 3 - Future Seawall
Construction. Mr. Francisco asked the audience to review the
property owner information sheets and advise him of errors.
In summary, Mr. Cooper stated that the GHAD currently has no source
for income and the consultants recommend that the CHAD utilize the
special assessment proceedings pursuant to the Public Resources
Code. If a large number or property owners wanted to construct
seawalls, the GAHD could utilize the 1911, 1913 and 1915 Acts. If
only a couple people want to construct walls, the GHAD via the 1913
Act could form an assessment district and ask that the City of
Encinitas fund the bluff improvements. The City would be reimbursed
03/04/96 G.H.A.D. Page 3 Mtg. #96 -04
• •
by property owners over 20 years as special assessment installment payments are made
by the property owner.
BOARD MEMBER COMMENTS
Chairman Oakley asked about refinancing walls already privately built, transferring them
to the District etc. Counsel Diven answered no, the assessment process cannot,provide an
avenue to refinance.
Regarding the 1913 and 1915 Acts, a one half million dollar bond would be a practical
figure. Less than one half million would not be practical.
Direactor Pierce stated City Council asked about recovering funds already advanced to
the GHAD and were told this would not be possible through the assessment process.
Director Fulton said the Comprehensive LCLP made reference to the GHAD as a vehicle
to raise money for construction and maintenance of seawalls. Asst. City Mgr. Jim
Benson thought GHAD had been removed per Mr. Benson's staff meeing direction.
Getting concepts implemented through the Calif. Coastal Commission is a problem. The
City is not locked in to GHAD but some mechanism must be there regarding some
feasibile concept. Chairman Oakley stated that the City's decision to not quit -claim the
bluffs to the property owners may turn out to be a benefit.
Chairman Oakley called for a 10 minute recess at 8:10 p.m.
C. Comments and Discussion by GHAD Member Property Owners
Luann Knott - GHAD Member - Co -owner 478 -480 Neptune Avenue
Ms. Knott thanked the GHAD Board Members for their services and time spent working
for th eGHAD. She stated the Scope of Work handout had incorrect information on
Parcels 12 and 13 and she asked how Berryman and Henigar received their informatoin.
The error throws the nu;mbers off. Consultants will follow up.
Paul Harlow - GHAD Member - 492 Neptune Avenue (since 1970)
Mr. Harlow stated he was forced to join th eGHAD. He had already built a seawall and
didn't need the GHAD. Now he feels seventeen property owners are being saddled with
the costs of maintenance and operation. It was explained to him that the costs would be
spread to ALL GHAD Members but only those with walls would be assessed and the City
would be asked to pick up the excess. Mr. Harlow then asked when he could vote. Mr.
Diven explained the protest process including public meeings - and stated that ultimately
the final vote is made by the GHAD Board.
John Wise - GHAD Member - 364 Neptune Avenue
Mr. Wise stated he didn't see how GHAD fits into the Citiy Plan and asked if the GHAD
is a viable entity. The California Coastal Lcommission says the GHAD is a viable entity
to build seawalls. Chairman Oakley explained the California Coasstal Commission
03/04/96 G.H.A.D. Page 4 Mtg. #96 -04
wants continuity and uniformity in
not piece meal construction. Mr.
Coastal Commission is changing and
will do 4 -5 months down the road.
•
the construction of seawalls -
Benson further stated that the
we can only speculate what they
Charles Evleth - GHAD Member - 312 Neptune Avenue '
Mr. Evleth asked if the actual cost of seawall maintenance was less
than estimated, would assessment monies be refunded or held for the
following year. Mr. Cooper stated the GHAD would adjust their
budget each year but over the first few years he would-recommend
they accrue funds and hold in reserve for an emergency. Mr. Evleth
asked if seawalls would be assessed on property tax bills. The
County Assessor's Office has said - "only if the City quit- claims
the bluffs to property owners." It's unknown at this -time where
this will end up.
d. Comments from other Bluff Propertv Owners
Mary (Pat) Holzinger - 1564 Neptune Avenue
Ms. Holzinger stated she is looking for reasonableness and a
palatable solution. She's feel very frustrated. She doesn't want
to join GHAD and questions whether new seawalls really need
maintenance the first couple of years. Asst. City Manager Benson
stated there is a lot of competition for City dollars and the City
is looking for a tolerable method. City Council will make a
decision regarding public benefits and protection of private
property.
Marlene Pendleton, Co -Chair Seacoast Preservation Assn. 1312
Neptune Avenue
Ms. Pendleton thanked Chairman Oakley for credit given earlier to
Seacoast Preservation Association - saying "We tried."
Ms. Pendleton stated that when the Local Coastal Plan is adopted
she hopes it will be the City and citizens of Encinitas opportunity
to stand up to the California Coastal Commission, that we're going
to be in control of our own destiny. She asked that the GHAD Board
stand firm on what they will and will not accept from the Coastal
Commission and staff ultimately.
Resolution #96 -43
Oakley moved, Fulton seconded to continue the Feasibility study to
March 15, 1996, 2:00 p.m. Motion carried. Ayes: Robert Frickman,
Wanda Fulton, Don Pierce, Gwenn Truax, David Oakley. Nays - None.
There being no further business, Chairman Oakley adjounred the
eting at 9:02 p
David S. Oakley, Chai a
By;` Jo Ann Pine
'_Recording Secretary
03/04/96 G.H.A.D. Page 5 Mtg. #96 - -04