November 21, 2008 TO: Council President Peters An

601

OFFICE OF INDEPENDENT BUDGET ANALYST CITY OF SAN DIEGO MEMORANDUM

DATE: November 21, 2008

TO: Council President Peters and Members of the City Council

FROM: Andrea Tevlin, Independent Budget Analyst I/^AKJA^^ 0 - - I

SUBJECT: Summary of Recommended Changes to the Fiscal Year 2009 Budget

On November 24, 2008, the City Council will consider approving changes to the Fiscal Year 2009 Budget. The City Council Committee of the Whole and Budget and Finance Committee met jointly for public hearings on November 12, 2008 and November 19, 2008 on the Mayor's proposed budget amendments. The IBA issued Report 08-118, dated November 17, 2008, entitled "Recommended Actions on the FY 2009 Budget Adjustment Proposal" which describes additional information related to the Mayor's proposed budget amendments, and offers alternatives and options to the City Council for consideration.

This memorandum provides a summary of the recommendations contained in that report to assist with the City Council's discussion on Monday, November 24, 2008. The IBA recommends approval of budget and service reductions in the Mayor's Budget Amendment Report, with exceptions to the reductions made to the Park and Recreation and Library Departments. In addition, further clarification and additional information is requested in other areas. In summary, the recommendations are as follows:

Approve Items A through G, listed below and as discussed in IBA Report 08-118, as changes to the Mayor's original proposal.

A. Library and Recreation Center Closures - Option 1 Defer a decision on Library branch and Recreation Center closures until a multi-year, comprehensive facility plan is brought forward to the City Council in early 2009.

B. Explore options with the Mayor for the future use of the Library System Improvement Program Fund.

C. Confirm that proposed Fire "rolling brown outs" is a temporary solution through FY 2009 by requesting a revision to the Five-Year Outlook to include associated costs in FY 2010 and beyond. Page 2 Council President Peters and Members of the City Council November 21, 2008

D. Confirm that the proposed reductions in Fire and Police Academy classes are a temporary solution through FY 2010 by requesting a revision to the Five-Year Outlook to include associated costs in FY 2011 and beyond.

E. Request the Mayor to pursue a mandatory furlough for FY 2009 as well as FY 2010.

F. Request the Mayor to consider an across-the-board user fee increase that could be implemented in FY 2009.

G. Request the Mayor to explore increasing the fee associated with the Junior Lifeguard Program.

The attached chart presents costs associated with recommended expenditures changes and possible resource options. Possible FY 2009 Mid-Year Budget Changes Expenditures Amount Defer Library Closures $1,700,000 Defer Recreation Center Closures $770,000 TOTAL $2,470,000

Possible Resources Reservoir Recreation BPR $240,000 Transient Occupancy Tax Surplus $2,400,000 Library System Improvements Fund $5,300,000 TOTAL $7,940,000

Other Options Not Recommended Waiver of Mission Bay Ordinance $4,900,000 1. CERTIFICATE NUMBER, nnnnn o REQUEST FOR COUNCIL ACTION (FOR AUDITOR'S USE O 601 UUUUU u CITY OF SAN DIEGO 11/24 TO: 2. FROM (ORIGINATING DEPARTMENT): 3. DATE: City Council Financial Management November 20, 2008 d. SUBJECT: Amend the Fiscal Year 2009 Budget S, PRIMARY CONTACT. (NAME, PHONE & MAIL ST A.) B. SECONDARY CONTACT (NAME. PHONE & MAIL ST A.) 7. CHECK BOX IF REPORT TO COUNCIL IS ATTACHED X Nader Tirandazi 236-6060 Angela Colton 236-5988 8.COMPLETE FOR ACCOUNTING PURPOSES 9. ADDITIONAL INFORMATION / ESTIMATED COST: FUND

OEPT.

ORGANIZATION

OBJECT ACCOUNT

JOB ORDER

C.I.P. NUMBER

AMOUNT 10. ROUTING AND APPROVALS

ROUTE APPROVING DATE ROUTE APPROVING DATE {*) AUTHORJTY APPROVAL SIGNATURE SIGNED (#) AUTHORITY APPROVAL SIGNATURE SIGNED ORIGINATING 1 8 CFO DEPARTMENT / I 9 COO ·ffl^t^^Si) »/*/# 3 10 CITY ATTORNEY / f^y -

4 11 ORIGINATING DEPARTMENT

5 DOCKET COORD; COUNCIL LIAISON;

6 · C0SIDCIL '-' SP0 B '-' C0NSEN T .^-ADOPTION

T. A^ X fl REFER TO:" COUNCIL DATE: ( fli/Ctf ii. PREPARATION OF: x RESOLUTION{S) D ORDINANCE(S) · AGREEMENT(S) Q DEED(S)

1. Approve the Amendments to the Fiscal Year 2009 Budget as recommended by the Mayor

11 A. STAFF RECOMMENDATIONS; 1. Approve the requested action

12, SPECIAL CONDITIONS; COUNCIL DISTRICTfS): CITYWIDE COMMUNITY AREA(S): ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT: THIS ACTIVITY IS NOT A PROJECT AND IS THEREFORE EXEMPT FROM CEQA PURSUANT TO STATE GUIDELINES. HOUSING IMPACT: OTHER ISSUES:

CM-1472 MSWORD2003 (REV.3-1-2006) GO (R-2009-630) M i ,

RESOLUTION NUMBER R-

DATE OF FINAL PASSAGE

RESOLUTION OF THE COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF SAN DIEGO AMENDING THE FISCAL YEAR 2008-2009 BUDGET

WHEREAS, the Council of the City of San Diego approved an annual budget for Fiscal

Year 2009 on June 23, 2008 as Resolution No. R-303797; and

WHEREAS, the Council of the City of San Diego adopted Ordinance No. 0-19774 entitled "An Ordinance Adopting the Annual Budget for the Fiscal Year 2009 and Appropriating the Necessary Money to Operate the City of San Diego for Said Fiscal Year"; and

WHEREAS, the anticipated revenues appropriated in the'Appropriations Ordinance are inadequate to fund City operations through the end of Fiscal Year 2009. and a report regarding such matters was presented to City Council as Mayor's Report No. 08-166, Revised, Fiscal Year

2009 Budget Amendment Report, #08-166, dated November 5, 2008. with additional information contained in Addendum to Fiscal Year 2009 Budget Amendment Report, #08-0J 66, Transient

Occupancy Tax (TOT) Fund Corrective Actions, dated November ] 0, 2008, and Addendum to

Fiscal Year 2009 Budget Amendment Report, $08-0166, Corrected and Additional Information, dated November 11, 2008 [collectively, "Mayor's Report"]; and,

WHEREAS, the Mayor's Report recommended the annual budget for Fiscal Year 2009 be amended; and

-PAGE I OF 3- (R-2009-630)

WHEREAS, The Independent Budget Analyst [IBA] has issued reports suggesting alternatives to the Mayor's Report in IBA reports entitled, Preliminary IBA Review of Mayor's

-Tmpo-s^dFY2009~Budgetl4dJustmMtsTlBA^

Recopimended Actions on FY2009 Budget Adjustment Proposal, IBA Report No. 08-118, dated

November 17,2008; and

WHEREAS, the City Council Committee of the Whole and Budget and Finance

Committee met jointly for public hearings on November 12, 2008 and November 19, 2008 on the

Mayor's proposed amendments; and

WHEREAS, the City Council at their Special Meeting on November 24, 2008 considered all of the comments and recommendations regarding amendments to the annual budget for Fiscal

Year 2009; NOW, THEREFORE;

BE IT RESOLVED by the Council of the City of San Diego that the amendments to the

Fiscal Year 2009 Budget as detailed in Exhibit A are hereby approved.

BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED, that the City Attorney is directed to work with Financial

Management to prepare an amendment to the Fiscal Year 2009 Appropriation Ordinance.

APPROVED: MICHAEL J. AGUIRRE, City Attorney

"ence V. Tomanek Chief Deputy City Attorney

LVT: 11-21-08 Or. Dept: FM R-2009-630

-PAGE 2 OF 3- (R-2009-630)

I hereby certify that the foregoing Resolution was passed by the Council of the City of San Diego, at this meeting of ,

'·ELIZABETH'SrMALAND' City Clerk

By Deputy City Clerk

Approved: (date) JERRY SANDERS, Mayor

Vetoed: (date) JERRY SANDERS, Mayor

-PAGE 3 OF 3- NOV 1 9 2008 U 000005 THE: CITY OF S A N DIEGO

OFFICE OF THE INDEPENDENT BUDGET ANALYST REPORT

Date Issued: November 17, 2008 IBA Report Number: 08-118 Budget and Finance Committee Date: November 19, 2008

Item Number: 1

Recommended Actions onFY 2009 Budget Adjustment Proposal

On November 5, the Chief Operating Otficer released the Fiscal Year 2009 Budget Amendment Report, which revealed a net current year deficit of $31,1 million based on iirsi quarLer revenue unci expeiiuituie projecuons, and proposed a series of budget anu service reductions in order to mitigate the anticipated shortfall. Some of the more significant service and budget impacts include closure of seven branch libraries, closure of nine recreation centers, reduction in police and fire academies and recruitment, and roiling reduction of two tire companies. These proposed budget and service reductions were discussed at the Special Joint Meeting of the Committee on Budget and Finance and City Council Committee of the Whole on November 12.

At the November 12 meeting, the Mayor also released the updated Five-Year Financial Outlook for FY 2010 - FY 2014. The Five-Year Outlook painted a dire financial picture, with significant deficits projected in each of the next five fiscal years, including a $44.0 million deficit in FY 2010 and a $68.0 million deficit in FY20 11. In addition, it was discovered at the November 12 meeting that these projected deficits assumed that the budget and service reductions proposed for FY 2009 were maintained for the full five year period. As in prior years, the IBA will be providing a complete analysis of the Five- Year Outlook to the Budget and Finance Committee in January, as well as continue to monitor the current year budget status. However, the message is clear: the City of San Diego is facing serious financial strain.

This report presents the IBA's recommendations with respect to the proposed budget and service reductions for FY 2009. Given the bleak financial outlook, decisive action must be taken immediately to begin addressing the budget shortfall. In all likelihood, the budget and service reductions proposed for FY 2009 will pale in comparison to the reductions that will be needed to close future budget gaps. Revisions to the proposed budget and service reductions should only be considered for the most critical public services. With this consideration, we recommend that identified resources be used only to defer closure of the seven branch libraries and nine recreation centers in FY 2009 until

Office of Independent Budget Analyst 202 [Street, MS 3A*Son Diego, CA92101 fe! (619) 236-6555 Fox (619) 236-6556 000006 a comprehensive plan is brought forward to Council. We wish to emphasize that the deferral of library and recreation center closures should be considered a temporary measure, intended only to keep these facilities open until a more deliberate and comprehensive plan for facility closures is developed and presented to Council. This plan should clearly lay out the facility closures and service reductions that will be needed to solve projected future budget deficits, in a manner that is consistent with community priorities. We also recommend that the "rolling brown outs" for Fire not be assumed for continuation beyond FY 2009; and the Fire and Policy Academy class reductions not be assumed for continuation past FY 2010. All other reductions remain as proposed.

In summary, our recommendations are based on the following: · The City is facing a structural budget deficit and a cyclical economic decline. Permanent solutions must be found for the structural budget deficit. · Some one-time or short-term solutions, however, should continue to be pursued as they can achieve sizable savings in a relatively short period and can help the City weather the effects of this cyclical economic decline. · The current year budget must be revised as soon as possible to correct the budget shortfall. · It is estimated that another $44.0 million deficit must be addressed to balance the FY 2010 budget, · Significant deficits, after current year corrective actions, are projected for at least the next five years. · Potential impacts from State budget actions have not been taken into account and could be an additional impact of S35.0 million to the General Fund.

RECOMMENDED ACTIONS ON BUDGET ADJUSTMENT PROPOSAL

A. Library and Recreation Center Closures

As core City services, long-term or permanent closures of branch libraries and recreation centers warrant a public discussion with the City Council regarding how specific facilities have been chosen for closure; future plans for the facilities; potential impacts on the neighborhood; and plans for community notification. The proposed closures of seven libraries were originally announced as temporary through FY 2010 or "when funding becomes available." When the Five-Year Financial Outlook was presented last week the branch libraries and recreation centers were presented as cuts through at least FY 2014. Realistically, with the Outlook showing significant deficits in each of the five years after all corrective actions, the proposed temporary closures are at best long-term and at worst permanent.

We have pursued options for reducing both branch library hours and recreation center hours in lieu of closures. Reducing hours is a common, long-term, operational cost saving strategy when faced with budget shortfalls. However, a reduction of hours, at 000007 least for full substitution of the closures, has been rejected by both the Library Director and the Park and Recreation Director citing implementation difficulties, negative impact on operations, significant diminution of services and inability to achieve savings equal to the proposed closures. Memos are forthcoming from the Directors on this matter.

Given the significant deficits the City is facing in future years and the likelihood of greater cuts to come, we are recommending a comprehensive facility plan addressing proposed closures along with proposed openings be brought to Council by February 2009 in order to prepare for the future. This will allow the new Council members to be involved in major service delivery decisions which bear long-term impacts on their districts.

Based on projected deficits and future calls for additional departmental cuts, this plan should identify phased closures over a period of several fiscal years based on a range of factors including geographic dispersion; proximity to other facilities; community usage; access to transportation; usage by schools and other groups. Planned building upgrades and maintenance expenses should be reviewed and reconsidered where possible to avoid unnecessary expenditures in light of pending closures. Reducing hours at some facilities should be reevaluated along with closures to determine if this could help minimize closures in the future.

Library closures or consolidations should be evaluated with respect to new facilities under construction or planned for the future. City Council, Board of Library Commissioners, the Library Foundation and community input should be solicited in the development of this plan. The plan should address potential future uses of the buildings and related.property, including potential revenue from their sale or lease; issues of public safety and blight; costs for ongoing maintenance of the closed facilities; and a plan for . advance notification to the community.

We are offering two options for Council consideration with respect to this specific issue:

Option 1: Defer a decision on Library branch and Recreation Center closures until a multi-year, comprehensive facility plan is brought forward to the City Council. This is our preferred option.

Request that this plan be provided to Council for public discussion by February 1, 2009 for implementation no later than July 1, 2009, sooner if possible in order to achieve greater savings. (Cost impacts of a 3-6 month deferral can be offset by FY 2009 savings from the Reservoir Recreation BPR and the Transient Occupancy Tax surplus.)

Option 2: Support moving forward now with the closures proposed for FY 2009 but request a comprehensive facility plan be brought forward to the City Council, as discussed above, and prior to any closure decisions being made for FY 2010. 000008 As we have inquired further regarding the proposed closures, a number of issues have surfaced that need further clarification as a part of this plan: · A new North University Library was opened in 2007, 2.33 miles away from University Community Library which is now on the closure list. This closure appears to be logical in light of the new facility. But if it was considered a replacement library, why was it not closed at the time the new library opened or made clear to the community that this library was planned to be replaced? What is the City's approach with respect to old libraries when they are in the vicinity of new libraries, and how is it communicated to the public? · Also, the University Community Library, proposed for closure, is also proposed for expansion in the City's Library Facilities Improvement Program. It has gone from being a facility identified for expansion in 2002 to being at the top of the list for closure. · The same is true for the Ocean Beach Library, which is on both the proposed closure list and the proposed expansion list. In 2005, the City purchased land adjacent to the Ocean Beach Library for this expansion. According to Council reports at the time, this property is collateral for a HUD Section 108 loan of $2.0 million garnered for the Ocean Beach Library. Loan payments are approximately $223,000 annually through FY 2017 and are being paid from District 2 CDBG allocations. What are the plans for the property purchased for this expansion and are there, restrirtirvnc nn the nrrvnertv'? _ _ „ - - - — — j— r — j . · A new Logan Heights Library of 25,000 square feet is under construction and is scheduled to open in Fall 2009. This library is to replace the current 3,967 square foot library but the old library is not one of the seven proposed for closure. Are the closure costs for old Logan Heights already assumed in the budget? How is the City going to be able to provide adequate staffing when a 4.000 square foot library is replaced with a 25,000 square foot library? · Five new branch libraries are in various planning stages. Each of them is 3-6 times larger than their existing replacement facility. How will the City be able to staff these facilities - through additional closures?

Library Facility Improvement Projects New Branch Libraries to be Built # Location Replacement Old Sq Ft New Sq Ft Status of Project 1. Balboa Yes 5,092 16.250 Old library to be demolished 2. Mission HiUs/Hillcrest Yes 3,850 25,000 City has purchased site 3. North Park Yes 8,000 25,000 Looking at sites 4. Paradise Hills Yes 3,875 15,000 No site or funding yet 5. San Ysidro Yes 4,089 15,000 Site has been selected

If we are facing closure of seven of 35 branch libraries and nine of 52 recreation centers with the current S31.0 million deficit, what does this mean for FY 2010 with a reduction in hours not being an option? What is the plan for moving 000009 forward - are seven more branch library closures being proposed in a few months? FY 2009 and FY 2010 library and recreation center decisions should be made as a package, and a phased plan should be brought forward that could be put into place for FY 2011 as well. · The Library Facilities Improvement Program was approved in 2002 but has not been updated since. Projects have not,been reevaluated or reprioritized with an eye towards the City's operating budget capacity. Projects have been delayed due to lack of capital funding so the focus has been on pursuing those where grants or developer money has been received. At the same time, the issue related to operating costs has not been reconsidered in light of the City's ongoing budget challenges. · When the Program was developed in 2002, operating costs for all new facilities were fully identified. The Library Ordinance, requiring that a set level of General Funds be dedicated to libraries each year, was put into place that same year to secure a source of funding for these newly identified operating costs. However, as pressure came to bear on the General Fund, the Library Ordinance has been waived since 2004, to free up funds for other priority areas. In the meantime, the City's Library program has not been revised and community expectations have not been revisited. Library closure has put the importance of this issue into focus.

A comprehensive plan will allow the City and the mnrmnnity to look at this issue from a big picture perspective rather than in a piecemeal fashion. It will allow for a discussion of other possible efficiencies and operational issues, such as the possibility for regional consolidation of facilities, which could yield even more significant savings as well as provide notice to the community of what is to come if the budget situation continues as predicted. We recommend that under either option that such a plan be developed and a full policy discussion be held with the City Council in early 2009.

B. Explore options with the Mayor for the future use of the Library System Improvement Program Fund

As part of the Library Facilities Improvement Program, a separate fund was established to provide for lease payments related to debt issuances, for project costs, and project management costs. As the City has not initiated debt issuances for library improvements, the program has not been fully implemented. However, funding for projects and related costs have been funded from the Library System Improvement Program Fund (102216). Cost increases for branch projects that have been able to move forward have utilized this funding source. At present, cash on hand exceeds $8.5 million, with current encumbrances of S3.2 million, leaving available funds of $5.3 million. While the needs of the many branch library projects exceed this amount, consideration could be given to accessing these funds to continue library services, while a comprehensive plan is developed. 000010 C. Confirm that proposed Fire "rolling brown outs" is a temporary solution only through FY 2009. Request that the Five-Year Outlook be revised to restore related costs beginning in FY 2010.

"Rolling brown outs," where two companies per day are reduced on a rotating basis, were originally proposed as a temporary cost saving solution. The Five-Year Outlook has assumed" continuance of this service reduction through FY 2014. To confirm this as a temporary solution only, we recommend that Council request revision of the Five-Year Outlook to restore the related costs beginning in FY 2010. This can be reevaluated in the Spring of 2009.

D. Confirm that the proposed reductions in Fire and Police Academy classes are a temporary solution through FY 2010. Request that the Five-Year Outlook be revised to reflect costs for full academy classes beginning again in FY 2011. Request information on projections for sworn staffing levels for both Police and Fire, based on current attrition levels, anticipated retirements, and academy reduced sizes for FY's 2009 - 2014.

Significant progress has been made in the area of Police officer retention since 2006 when staffing levels dropped far below critical staffing levels. Additionally, both Police and Fire will continue to experience time certain retirements tied to five year DROP requirements. The Council should have information on projected sworn staffing levels based on proposed reductions in academy classes when combined with expected retirements. The Council could request the IBA to monitor sworn staffing levels throughout the year and periodically report results to the Public Safety and Neighborhoods Committee.

E. With several months left in this fiscal year to potentiaDy generate savings from a mandatory furlough, request the Mayor to pursue a mandatory furlough for FY 2009 (as well as FY 2010).

The option of implementing a mandatory furlough to achieve savings as well as reduce fringe and pension costs has been discussed on numerous occasions. It requires meeting and conferring with City employees which would need to be initiated by the Mayor. We recommend that the Council request the Mayor to initiate these discussions as soon as .possible. A mandatory furlough is a common practice that can be implemented relatively swiftly and generate savings without directly impacting City services. If implemented in the current year, it is estimated that up to $2.0 million in savings could be realized. If not feasible for the current year, this could be pursued for FY 2010 to help minimize service reductions. However, it is important to note that if additional position reductions are required for FY 2010 the projected savings associated with the furlough could be less. 000011 F. Request the Mayor to consider an across-the-board user fee increase that could be implemented for FY 2009.

With the exception of a $200,000 increase in Park and Recreation and Fire-related fees, user fee increases are not considered as a possible source of new revenue for FY 2009. As the City's user fees have not been analyzed or increased in several years, it is likely the General Fund is increasingly subsidizing user fee activities at the expense of priority services. A User Fee policy is expected to come to Council next year for possible implementation in FY 2010: In the Five-Year Outlook, potential revenues are estimated up to $5.0 million annually.

In the interim, an across-the-board fee increase of 3-5% could be considered and possibly implemented in the current fiscal year. On an annual basis it is estimated that such an across the board increase could generate $1.0 - $2.0 million.

G. Request the Mayor to explore increasing the Junior Lifeguard Program Fee.

One of the proposed reductions for the Fire-Rescue Department is the elimination of 1.00 Organizational Effectiveness Specialist position, responsible for coordinating lifeguard community education, outreach, and recruitment efforts, including the Junior Lifeguard Program. Currently, the Junior Lifeguard Program charges a fee of S400 per participant: however, this fee does not recover the cost of this position. The IBA recommends that the Mayor return to the Council to discuss the feasibility of increasing the current program fee to enable the restoration of this position and the program.

RESOURCE OPTIONS THAT HAVE BEEN UNDER DISCUSSION

Reservoir Recreation BPR - $580,000 Ongoing The Reservoir Recreation BPR is expected to come forward for Council approval prior to the end of the calendar year. The IBA was briefed by the Business Office, Park and Recreation and Water Departments back in May 2008 on the highlights of the Reservoir Recreation BPR. At that time, recommendations included fee increases and service level changes which were to positively impact the General Fund in the net amount $935,000 for Fiscal Year 2009. Fee increases had not been made for over ten years, while maintenance and recreation costs have increased significantly. Due to a delay in approval and implementation, this positive impact is expected to be reduced for this fiscal year to $580,000. We are recommending this resource be used to offset costs associated with deferring library and recreation center closures for 3-6 months.

Transient Occupancy Tax Surplus - up to $2.4 million One-Time As identified in the November 10 memorandum on Transient Occupancy Tax (TOT) Fund corrective actions, the proposed reductions in TOT allocations would result in a fund balance of approximately S2.4 million. The memorandum states that this fund balance would be used to assist with balancing the FY 2010 budget, or to provide a reserve in case of additional declines in projected TOT revenue. However, this balance 000012 could also be used to fund additional promotion-related expenditures within the General Fund. We are recommending this resource also be used to offset costs associated with deferring library and recreation center closures for 3 - 6 months.

Release of Prior Year Encumbrances - up to $2.2 million One-Time When funds appropriated for City projects in previous fiscal years are not expended within the fiscal year, they are typically carried forward into the next fiscal year as prior year encumbrances. This provides funding for the projects to be completed in the next fiscal year. If City staff subsequently determines that encumbered funds are no longer needed for the projects, the remaining encumbrance can be released to fund balance providing unanticipated revenue to the City's General Fund. As mentioned in IBA Report # 08-114, the IBA has determined that approximately $2.2 million of prior year encumbrances have been released. These funds are available to the General Fund subject only to the City Comptroller taking action to deappropriate the released funds. We continue to recommend the immediate release of these funds.

Refuse Hauler Franchise Fee - $750,000 Ongomg/$190,000 in FY 2009 The-Refuse Hauler Franchise Fee is currently $11 per ton for Class I haulers (less than 75,000 tons per year) and $12 per ton for Class II haulers (more than 75,000 tons per year), and can be increased by Council action. While an increase to the Franchise Fee has not been recommended by the Mayor as an FY 2009 corrective action, it is identified in the Five-Year Financial Outlook as a possible solution for FY 2010 and beyond. A $1 increase in the Refuse Hauler Franchise Fee could generate approximately $750,000 on an annualized basis; however, due to the quarterly billing schedule, only $190,000 would be realized in FY 2009.

Mission Bay Park Ordinance Waiver for FY 2009 - up to S4.9 million One-Time The option for a one-time waiver of the FY 2009 appropriation to Mission Bay Park and Regional Park public capital improvements was discussed at last week's Council meeting. Under current Municipal Code 22.0229, the City Council has the ability to temporarily suspend compliance if City Manager (Mayor) determines that anticipated revenues in any fiscal year will be insufficient to maintain existing City Services.

Proposition C was recently passed though a ballot measure, and language in the amendment does not permit a suspension of the allocation to the improvement parks in the event of a fiscal emergency. However, due to the proposition's effective date of July 1, 2009, a one-time waiver could be implemented beforehand and therefore, would be in compliance with the current Charter language. If thewaiver was to occur, redirected funds from the improvement parks portion would increase the General Fund by $4.9 million in FY2009. This would be a one-time resource and would only be appropriate for one-time costs.

The IBA does not support this proposal as it is inconsistent with recent voter approval of Proposition C. 000013 CONCLUSION

We recommend approval of budget and service reductions in the Mayor's Budget Amendment Report, with the following modifications:

Approve Items A through G, discussed in this report, as changes to the Mayor's original proposal. For Item A, we recommend Option 1 over Option 2. In summary, the recommendations are as follows:

B. Explore options with the Mayor for the future use of the Library System Improvement Program Fund.

C. Confirm that proposed Fire "rolling brown outs" is a temporary solution through FY 2009 by requesting a revision to the Five-Year Outlook to include associated costs in FY 2010 and beyond.

E. Request the Mayor to pursue a mandatory furlough for FY 2009 as well as FY 2010.

F. Request the Mayor to consider an across-the-board user fee increase that could be implemented in FY 2009.

G. Request the Mayor to explore increasing the fee associated with the Junior Lifeguard Program.

The attached chart shows the changes to FY 2009 expenditures and resources associated with the recommended actions. 000014

UJ? Lisa Celaya Elaine DuVal Fiscal & Policy Analyst" Fiscal & Policy Analyst

^ Ttfm Haynes JefFKawar Fiscal & PolicyvAnalyst Fiscal & Policy Analyst

JeffSturalc ^lominika BuMf^a^ Fiscal & Policy Analyst Research Analyst

Attachment

10 Attachment 000015

Proposed FY 2009 Mid-Year Budget Changes Three-month Six-month Expenditures Delay Delay Defer Library Closures $850,000 $1,700,000 Defer Recreation Center Closures 5385,000 $770,000 TOTAL $1,235,000 $2,470,000

Resources Reservoir Recreation BPR $580,000 Transient Occupancy Tax Surplus $2,400,000 TOTAL $2,980,000

The impact of restoring "rolling brownouts" in FY 2010 is estimated at $3.2 million, and could potentially be offset by recommendations for user fees beginning in 2009 or 2010. BUDGET NOV 1 9 2008 000017 (R-2009-630)

RESOLUTION NUMBER R-_

DATE OF FINAL PASSAGE

RESOLUTION OF THE COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF SAN DIEGO AMENDING THE FISCAL YEAR 2008-2009 BUDGET

WHEREAS, the Council of the City of San Diego approved an annual budget for Fiscal

Year 2009 on June 23, 2008 as Resolution No. R-303797; and

WHEREAS, the Council of the City of San Diego adopted Ordinance No. 0-19774

entitled "An Ordinance Adopting the Annual Budget for the Fiscal Year 2009 and Appropriating

the Necessary Money to Operate the City of San Diego for Said Fiscal Year"; and

WHEREAS, the anticipated revenues appropriated in the Appropriations Ordinance are

inadequate to fund City operations through the end of Fiscal Year 2009, and a report regarding

such matters was presented to City Council as Mayor's Report No. 08-166, Revised, Fiscal Year

2009 Budget Amendment Report, #08-166, dated November 5, 2008, with additional information

contained in Addendum to Fiscal Year 2009 Budget Amendment Report, #08-0166, Transient

Occupancy Tax (TOT) Fund Corrective Actions, dated November 10, 2008, and Addendum to

Fiscal Year 2009 Budget Amendment Report, #08-0166, Corrected and Additional Information,

dated November 11, 2008 [collectively, "Mayor's Report"]; NOW, THEREFORE;

BE IT RESOLVED by the Council of the City of San Diego that the Mayor's Report

amending the Fiscal Year 2009 Budget is hereby approved.

-PAGE ] OF 2- (R-2009-630) 000018

BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED, that the City Attorney is directed to work with Financial

Management to prepare an amendment to the Fiscal Year 2009 Appropriation Ordinance.

APPROVED: MICHAEL J. AGUIRRE, City Attorney

Lawrence V. Tomanek Chief Deputy City Attorney

LVT: 11-17-08 Or.Dept:FM R-2009-630

I hereby certify that the foregoing Resolution was passed by the Council of the City of San Diego, at this meeting of ,

ELIZABETH S. MALAND City Clerk

By : Deputy City-Clerk

Approved: (date) JERRY SANDERS, Mayor

Vetoed: (date) JERRY SANDERS, Mayor

-PAGE 2 OF 2- ·f2U&&&i{ /' /(^ -^Y

000019

City of San Diego

City Attorney's Analysis of Pension Financial Information

Employee SOGERS Inflow City and City Pickup Investment to Retirement (C ontributions Contributions Earnings System Fiscal Year 2005 $ 130,000,000 S 101,555,252 $ 350,209,486 $ 581,764,738 Fiscal Year 2006 $ 271,298,430 $ 60,923,936 $ 455,726,222 $ 787,948,588 Fiscal Year 2007 $ 169,126,073 $ 67,345,152 $ 689,860,139 $ 926,331,364 Fiscal Year 2008 * $ 157,700,000 $ 65,000,000 $ (236,000,000) S (13,300,000) Fiscal Year 2009 ** $ 161,700,000 $ 15,000,000 $ (600,000,000) $ (423,300,000)

Total FY05 - FY 09 $ 889,824,503 $ 309,824,340 $ 659,795,847 $1,859,444,690

FY 2008 Unaudited FY 2009 Unaudited, includes only 3 months activiity

Unfunded Present Market Actuarial Value Value Accrued Future of Assets Liability Benefits

June 30, 2004 $ 3,368,239,286 $ 1,368,648,000 $ 5,467,447,943

June 30, 2008 ** S 4,428,855,765 S 2,200,000,000 $ 7,700,000,000

Change S 1,060,616,479 $ 831,352,000 $ 2,232,552,057

** Unaudited BUDGET NOV 1 9 2008 #1

FUNDING OF THE SAN DIEGO CITY EMPLOYEES' RETIREMENT SYSTEM

The San Diego City Employees' Retirement System (SDCERS) has been in an underfunded position for many years. The June 30, 2007 Actuarial Valuation prepared by the SDCERS actuary, Cheiron, shows the system to have been 93.3% funded in 1997. Since that time SDCERS has never been fully funded. The lowest funded percentage was 65.8% at June 30, 2004.

During the Fiscal Year July 1, 2007 through June 30, 2008, the SDCERS Trust experienced negative investment return on its investments. The market value of total assets (City, Port Authority and Airport) equaled $4,660 million at June 30, 2008, compared to $4,937 million at June 30, 2007. This equates to a return on investments of negative 4.69%. At December 31, 2007, the market value of assets was $5,054 million . The asset value increased during the first half of the fiscal year, and then decreased during the second half.

This loss in the market value has had its effect on the funding of SDCERS. Consider the following:

Asset Value

The soundness of a retirement system is a measurement of its assets compared to its l iabilities. Actuaries, being c oncerned with the long-range soundness of a retirement system, find it necessary to place an "actuarial value" on the assets. This can be as simple as the market value, or it can be a value chosen to lessen the effect on assets of severe year-to-year market fluctuations. The method to value assets employed by the actuary has no effect on the actuarial value of benefits, but it does affect the determination of the Annual Required Contribution (ARC).

The Cheiron valuation reports the funded ratio of the System on both a FASB No. 35 basis and a GASB No. 25 basis. In the FASB (Financial Accounting Standards Board) calculation, assets are valued at market value. The market, or fair, value of an investment is the amount that the System could reasonably expect to receive for it in a current sale between a willing buyer and a willing seller. The GASB (Government Accounting Standards Board) uses an actuarial value of assets.

The purpose of FASB is to show the funded percentage of benefits already accrued and vested. The amount of benefit accrued by an individual is the benefit payable upon termination of employment, death, disability or retirement. GASB, on the other hand, illustrates the percentage of funding based on the accumulation of past normal costs at the System's assumed rate of investment return. Therefore, FASB is based on benefits and GASB is based on normal costs.

Actuarial Service Company, P.C. November 19, 2008 000022 Effective June 30, 2006, Cheiron began using a method to value assets related to the market value. P reviously, the method was related to the book value of assets. At June 30, 2006, the actuarial value of assets was set equal to the market value of assets. Using the Expected Value of Assets Method, the June 30, 2007 actuarial value was determined by first calculating the expected actuarial value, equal to the fiscal year's actuarial value plus contributions less benefit payments and expense payments, all brought forward to June 30, 2007 at 8% interest. The expected value of assets is then increased or decreased by 25% of the excess of actual market value over expected market value.

Table 11-3 in the June 30, 2007 actuarial valuation shows the following for the City portion of the Trust:

1. Actuarial Value of Assets at June 30, 2006 $3,981,931,694

2. Amount in (1) with interest to June 30, 2007 4,300,486,230

3. Employer and Member contributions for the Plan Year ended 293,622,830 June 30, 2007

4. Disbursements from Trust excluding investment expenses, 262,148,308 June 30 2005 through June 30 2007

5. Interest on cash flows to June 30, 2007 at 8.00% 6,511,473

6 Expected Actuarial Value of Assets at June 30, 2007 4,338,472,224 = (2) + (3) - (4) + (5)

7. Actual Market Value of Assets at June 30, 2007 4,641,340,923

8. Excess of (7) over (6) 302,868,699

9. Actuarial Value of Assets at June 30, 2007 $4,414,189,399 = (6) + 25% of (8)

Liability Value

The calculation of the value of liabilities is dependent upon three factors - the benefits expected to be paid, the assumptions for future events and the actuarial method of applying the assumptions.

Cheiron has calculated liabilities for all benefits available to Members of SDCERS.

The assumptions e mployed by Cheiron in the June 30, 2007 actuarial valuation are the same as those used in previous valuations. The most significant assumptions are:

Actuarial Service Company, P.C. November 19. 2008 000023

Investment Return 8% net of expenses

inflation Rate 4.25%

Interest Credited to Member 8% compounded annually Contributions

Salary Increase Rate 4.25% plus an'additional merit component based on years of service

Cost-of-Living Increase in Benefits 2% per annum

Rates of termination, disability, death As shown in the valuation and retirement

In the June 30, 2008 actuarial valuation, Cheiron will be making many changes in these assumptions, based upon a study of experience from July 1, 2004 through June 30, 2007. The new assumptions are:

Investment Return 7.75% net of expenses

Inflation Rate 4%

interest Credited to Member 8% compounded annually Contributions

Salary Increase Rate 4% plus the same additional merit component based on years of service

Cost-of-Living Increase in Benefits 2% per annum

Rates of termination, disability, death Changes as shown in the experience and retirement study

Cheiron stated in their experience study that they "estimate that the net impact of all our recommended changes will produce results very close to those determined on the current assumptions."

In the June 30, 2006 actuarial valuation, Cheiron changed the method of calculating accrued liabilities from Projected Unit Credit (PUC),to Entry Age Normal (EAN). This change was anticipated and, in fact, had been suggested for some time. The EAN method determines for each active Member the level annual percentage of compensation necessary to provide the total estimated amount of b enefits, assuming that the contribution is paid from the Member's date of hire until his or her date of retirement. For each active Member a contribution for the current year

Actuarial Service Company, P.C. November 19. 2008 Page 3 000024 is determined by multiplying that Member's percentage by his or her compensation for the year. The sum of the current annual contributions for all active Members is referred to as the normal cost for the System.

As of the valuation date, there exists an accrued liability for the plan. That amount can be defined in two different ways. First, it is the accumulation of all past normal costs for active Members plus the present value of all future benefits expected to be paid to those Members who have either terminated with a vested benefit, become disabled or retired. An alternate way to define the accrued liability is the present value of all future benefits expected to be paid to active participants plus the present value of all future benefits expected to be paid to those Members who have either terminated with a vested benefit, become disabled or retired less the present value of all future normal costs for active Members. The EAN accrued liability is used to determine the GASB funded percentage.

At the valuation date, there is also a liability equal to the present value of all vested benefits already accumulated by the Members through the date of the valuation. These benefits are calculated using the same actuarial assumptions that were used to calculate the EAN accrued liability. The liability is not related to any contributions that may or may not have been made. The FASB liability (present value of vested accrued benefits, or PWAB) is used to determine the FASB funded percentage.

In the June 30, 2007 actuarial valuation, Cheiron reported these liabilities to be:

EAN Accrued Liability Present Value of Vested (GASB 25) Benefits (FASB 35)

Retirees $2,589,431,710 $2,589,431,710 Disabled 383,228,325 383,228,325 Beneficiaries 128,934,025 128,934,025 Terminated Vesteds 239.571,040 239.571,040 Subtotal 3,341,165,100 3,341,165,100 Actives 2.256.487.761 997.117.270 Total $5,597,652,861 $4,338,282,370

Here it can be seen that in both m ethods the liabilities for n on-active Members are the same. The difference is in the liability for active Members. Under GASB that liability is 2.25 times the FASB value, indicating that the liability is based on funding all past normal costs, but FASB considers only those benefits already earned.

Funded Percentage

The funded percentage of a system is the ratio of assets to liabilities. There are two such ratios. One is based on GASB and the other is based on FASB. At

Actuarial Service Company, P.C. November 19, 2008 Page 4 000025 June 30, 2007, the GASB funded ra tio was 78.86%, equal to the fraction $41414,189,399/$5,597,652,861. The FASB fu nded ratio was 106.99% ($4,641,340,923/$4,338,282,370).

GASB uses the ratio of actuarial value of assets to EAN accrued liability. This is logical, since the EAN accrued liability uses the accumulated value of past normal costs, which were determined using the current actuarial assumptions. U nder FASB, the ratio is the market value of assets to present value of vested accrued benefits. This is also logical, since both the market value of assets and the present value of vested accrued benefits look at the actual values at the time of the valuation.

Annual Required Contribution

The ARC has two parts. It consists of the normal cost plus the amortization of the unfunded actuarial accrued liability (UAAL). The UAAL is the difference between the EAN accrued liability, also known as the actuarial accrued liability (AAL), and the actuarial value of assets. Beginning June 30, 2007, the amortization amount is calculated as the level percentage of total Member payroll necessary to fund the UAAL over twenty years. Each year thereafter, the amortization period is reduced by one year. Beginning at June 30, 2008, the actuary will calculate an annual actuarial gain or loss, representing the value of the variation of actual System experience from assumed experience. Calculation of an actuarial gain or toss is necessary, since actual experience in areas such as return on investments, salary changes and ages at which Members actually retire will be different from that assumed. Each annual gain or loss is amortized separately over fifteen years. The change in the AAL that comes about solely due to changes in actuarial assumptions is amortized over thirty years. As with the UAAL, the amortization amount is calculated as the level percentage of total Member payroll necessary to fund the each actuarial gain or loss. '

In some years the amount of amortization contribution is such that the next year's UAAL will actually increase (negative amortization), due to the amount of contribution being less than simple interest on the outstanding balance. If this will occur, a n additional amortization amount is a dded that w ill prevent n egative amortization.

The ARC calculated in the June 30, 2007 actuarial valuation is $161.7 million, payable July 1, 2008, comprised approximately as follows:

Rate (Percent Amount (in of Payroll) Millions)

Amortization (20 Years) 15,77% $84.6 Amortization (Prevent Negative Amortization) 1.74% $9.4 Total Amortization 17.51% $94.0 City Normal Cost 12.92% $67.7 Total ARC 30.43% $161.7

Actuarial Service Company. P.C. November 19. 2008 Page 5 000026 June 30. 2008

I have previously performed parallel actuarial valuations as of June 30, 2005 and 2006. I have not done so as of June 30, 2007 or 2008. However, based on my, reading of the Cheiron actuarial valuations as of June 30, 2005, 2006 and 2007, I am able to make estimates of the possible results of the June 30, 2008 actuarial valuation . On November 14, 2008, I spoke with Gene Kalwarski, the Principal Consulting Actuary at Cheiron. Mr. Kalwarski indicated to me that although there have been actuarial losses due to the negative return on investments, there have also been actuarial gains in other areas, such as salary increases and payroll growth being less than assumed. This will have an effect on both the UAAL and on the ARC.

Since the calculation of the actuarial value of assets recognizes only 25% of the year's asset gain or loss, the effect of the fiscal year 2008 asset loss on the June 30, 2008 actuarial value of assets is not as severe as the magnitude of the losses, and the losses will be partially offset by 25% of the June 30, 2007 asset gain. Furthermore, any actuarial gain or loss coming about due to the change in actuarial assumptions will be amortized over thirty years. Remember that the actuarial value of assets is used in the calculation of the GASB funded percentage. The FASB funded percentage is based on the market value of assets.

Cheiron has reported to me that the market value of assets at June 30, 2008 was $4,428,855,765. Assuming contribution and disbursement amounts are the same as in the fiscal year 2007, I have calculated the actuarial value of assets at June 30, 2008 to be $4,786,927,438. For purposes of this report, I will round that amount to $4.8 billion. The actuarial value of assets is a full 8% higher than the market value of assets.

If I assume that the growth in the AAL from June 30, 2007 to June 30, 2008 follows the same pattern as the growth from June 30, 2005 through June 30, 2007, and if the change in actuarial assumptions adds 2%, I estimate the AAL at June 30, 2008 was $6.4 billion. The estimated UAAL is then $1.6 billion. Using this same methodology, I estimate the PWAB at June 30, 2008 was $5.1 billion. The estimated unfunded PWAB is $700 million.

The AAL funded percentage is estimated to be 75%, while the funded percentage of the PWAB is estimated to be 86%.

In the 2010-2014 Five-Year Financial Outlook, it is forcasted that the fiscal Year 2010 ARC will be $166 million . In my conversations with Gene Kalwarski, he confirmed this amount to be a good estimate, although his calculations are not completed. Based on my estimates, as presented above, I arrive at a slightly higher estimate. This may indicate that my estimates of the AAL and PWAB are slightly overstated. If so, the UAAL may be as low as $1.4 billion and the unfunded PWAB may be as much as $150 million lower.

Summarizing, my estimates for June 30, 2008 are as follows:

Actuarial Service Company. P.C. November 19. 2008 Page 6 000027

Actuarial Value of Assets $4.8 billion Actuarial Accrued Liability $6.4 billion Unfunded Actuarial Accrued Liability $1.6 billion GASB Funded Percentage 75% Market Value of Assets $4.4 billion Present Value of Vested Accrued Benefits $5.1 billion Unfunded Present Value of Vested Accrued Benefits $700 million FASB Funded Percentage 86% Fiscal Year 2010 Annual Required Contribution * $166 million

* Estimated by Cheiron

Beyond June 30. 2008

As of October 3 1, 2008, total SDCERS Trust assets for the City were approximately $3,555 billion. From June 30, 2008 to October 31, 2008, the market value of assets has fallen more than $800 million . Assume the same value exists at June 30, 2009. Because assets are smoothed, the actuarial value of assets at June 30, 2009 will only go down to $4.5 billion, a drop of $300 million .

Using very broad estimates, it is possible that the decrease in the actuarial value of assets may cause the GASB funded percentage to go down to 65% and the decrease in the market value may cause the FASB funded percentage to go down to almost the same percentage. The fiscal year 2011 ARC will also rise, but not in proportion to the decrease in the market value of assets.

This latter percentage (FASB) is cause for concern. At June 30, 2007, assets exceed the PWAB by 7%. If these broad estimates prove true, only 65%-70% of the PWAB will be funded at June 30, 2009. In order of priorities, 100% of Member contributions will be funded, less than 100% of retirees and beneficiaries will be funded and none of the PWAB of active Members will be funded.

The Pension Protection Act of 2006 (PPA) was signed into law by the President on August 17, 2006. While its provisions, in large part, are applicable only to the private sector, it is worth considering in today's economy. Defined benefit pension plans in the private sector are now subject to strict minimum funding standards. The method of calculating liabilities and the assumptions to be used are now prescribed under rules in the PPA. Furthermore, unfunded liabilities must be fully amortized in seven years. While it is beyond the scope of this report, it is likely that applying those minimum funding rules to SDCERS would more than triple the ARC until such time as the,unfunded liabilities are fully amortized.

Actuarial Service Company, P.C. November 19, 2008 000029 ·gMP^er (v fl^ t jkr\

11 O.J -<

Report to the Special Joint Meeting of the Committee on Budget and Finance and City Council Committee of the Whole

David B. Wescoe Administrator/CEO

November 19, 2008 000030

Introduction

Since becoming SDCERS' Administrator/CEO in May 2006, I have been committed to improving communications with all three of our plan sponsors. Consistent with this commitment, and given the seriousness of the current situation facing the City resulting from today's unprecedented turmoil in the world's financial markets, I wanted to provide you with: (1) the historical context of current investment markets, (2) SDCERS' fiscal year 2009 year-to-date mvestment performance, and (3) the impact of SDCERS' investment returns on the City's Annual Required Contribution (ARC).

Historical Context

SDCERS has been in the investment business since 1927 and has never missed a benefit payment. Even with the recent market downturn, as of October 31, 2008, SDCERS has approximately S3.7 billion dollars of assets, more than enough to pay retiree benefits when they come due.

SDCERS invests its money for the very long term. For an employee hired today, we invest for their 30-year career, a 30-year retirement and a spousal continuance that might extend for another ten years. As a result of this 70-year time horizon, SDCERS' investment nbilnscmhy and strategy is geared tn long-term results- Short-term market declines, even those as severe as what we are experiencing today, are, in relation to SDCERS' time horizon, just that: short-term.

Because of this long-term focus, SDCERS has never, and should never, manage its portfolio for the short term. Our disciplined strategy of a well-balanced portfolio has and will continue to work over the long haul.

Indeed, Warren Buffett recently wrote in The New York Times ("Buy American. I Am.", N.Y.Times, 10/17/08) that, "fears regarding the long-term prosperity of the nation's many sound companies make no sense. These businesses will indeed suffer earnings hiccups, as they always have. But most major companies will be setting new profit records 5, 10 and 20 years from now." He also said:

Over the long term, the stock market news will he good. I n the 20th century, the United States endured two world wars and other traumatic and expensive military conflicts; the Depression; a dozen or so recessions and financial panics; oil shocks; a flu epidemic; and the resignation of a disgraced president. Yet the Dow rose from 66 to 11,497.

1 am confident in SDCERS' ability to manage through investment downturns, and our long-term investment track record supports that confidence: For the 10 years ended June 30, 2008, SDCERS ranked ahead of 96 percent of other public pension funds.

Finally, during the past 30 months, SDCERS has accomplished more administratively than any other pension plan in the country. We have implemented more conservative 000031

actuarial methods, completed an actuarial experience study, established an independent Audit Committee, issued four CAFRs with audited financial statements, strengthened Board governance, established a Group Trust, increased our internal investment resources, completed the IRS' Voluntary Correction Program and received a favorable IRS tax determination letter confirming SDCERS' status as a tax-qualified plan. Very few governmental pension plans have a current determination letter, and SDCERS now is recognized as a leader among governmental plans in tax compliance.

SDCERS' FY 2009 Year-To-Date Investment Performance

But even with this historical context, there is no debate about the current turmoil in the global financial markets. To quote Mr. Buffett's Times article again:

The financial world is a mess, both in the United States and abroad. Its problems, moreover, have been leaking into the general economy, and the leaks are now turning into a gusher. In the near term, unemployment will rise, business activity will falter and headlines will continue to be scary.

Clearly, unlike San Diego's prior pension problems, what we are experiencing today is not unique to San Diego. T his is a national problem that every level of government, every business, and every pension plan is dealing with. T he CalPER.S trust fund lost more than 20% of its value between July 1 and October 10, and it is undoubtedly lower today. CalPERS also is notifying its local government participants that if current investment market losses are sustained, their contribution payments for FY 2011 may rise. Corporate pension plans have suffered significant investment losses, too.

Because SDCERS invests in the global markets, it is no surprise that SDCERS' performance has suffered. S DCERS' FY 2009 first quarter ended September 30, 2008 return was -10.1% (excluding private real estate, whose valuations are lagged one quarter). October was a terrible month for stocks. The Dow was down 14.1%, its worst drop since August 1998. All 30 of the companies in the index had price declines. The S&P and NASDAQ indices were down 16.8% and 17.7%, respectively. (SDCERS' long- standing practice is to measure the trust fund's performance quarterly, not monthly.)

However, it is important to keep in mind, the market downturn we have experienced since July 1, bad as it is, reflects just over one quarter of SDCERS' four-quarter fiscal 2009 year. And, as always, the Board of Administration's Investment Committee and SDCERS' investment staff closely monitor the activities of our 30 professional money managers and custodial bank.

Impact of SDCERS' Investment Returns on the City's AR C

Fiscal Year 2009. Today's investment environment and SDCERS' current investment assets have no impact on the City's FY 2009 budget. As I wrote to Ms. Tevlin on November 10, the City paid its FY 2009 Annual Required Contribution (ARC) of $161.7 million in full on July 1, 2008. In addition to this payment, the City also will pay 000032

approximately Si.2 million to fund the City's Preservation of Benefit Plan (POB) for FY 2009.

Fiscal Year 2010. SDCERS' investment performance for the fiscal year ended June 30, 2008 was -4.66%. This performance will be, in part, reflected in our actuary's calculations in preparing the City's June 30, 2008 Actuarial Valuation. That Valuation will include the City's FY 2010 ARC that will be due on July 1, 2009. SDCERS' actuary, Gene Kalwarski of Cheiron, will be in San Diego on Friday, December 19, 2008 to present the City's June 30, 2008 Actuarial Valuation in public session to the SDCERS Board of Administration. Each of you will be provided with a copy of the Valuation when we receive it, and I invite you to attend the Board meeting to hear Mr. Kalwarski's presentation in person. I have asked Mr. Kalwarski to return to San Diego after that meeting to present the Valuation to the Council and to answer any questions you might have.

Unfortunately, prompted by the City Attorney, Joseph Esuchanko stated during his Council appearance last week that "approximately $85 million" would need to be added to the forecasted $166 million FY 2010 ARC payment contained in the City's "Five-Year Financial Outlook" for 2010-2014. The accurate FY 2010 ARC payment won't be known until Cheiron publicly discloses it on December 19. However, based on preliminary estimates by Cheiron that have not been certified, Mr. Esuchanko's prediction is materially off the mark. ( Unfortunately, Mr. Esuchanko's prediction was picked up in the press and reported as fact. See, Gene Cubbison, "Pension Deficit Saps City Budget," NBC 11/13/08, and Don Bauder, San Diego Reader, "City Pension Fund Only...," 11/11/08.)

Fiscal Year 2011. The City's FY 2011 ARC will be based, in part, on SDCERS' investment returns from July 1, 2008 through June 30, 2009. Only when all four fiscal quarters have been concluded, on June 30, 2009, and the ARC payment calculated by Cheiron, will the impact of the current market condition on the City be known for sure. That calculation will be completed just over one year from now, and the corresponding ARC will be payable by the City on July 1, 2010.

Since 1990, of the 18 periods from October 31 through the following June 30, 14 periods showed market gains. We hope this historical trend continues. If it doesn't, and as reflected in the City's FY 2011 Forecast in Scenario 2 of the Five-Year Financial Outlook (Table V), the City's FY 2011 ARC payment willreflect a significant increase over whatever the City's FY 2010 payment is.

Investment Returns and the ARC. It is critical to understand that the market value of assets is just one aspect of a complex actuarial picture. Public pension plan actuaries do not base their calculations on the current market value of assets; rather, they calculate an actuarial value of assets in order to dampen fluctuations, up or down, in investment retums. Other actuarial variables also can offset negative investment returns, including 000033 favorable experience in the inflation, disability, termination, active mortality or salary increase rates.

Any attempt to estimate an accurate actuarial valuation that is based only on the change in one variable, like the market value of assets, and that fails to consider the possible offsetting impact of other variables, will be misleading. Because of the interrelationship of so many actuarial factors, the only actuarial numbers that can be relied on for accuracy are those contained in SDCERS' June 30 actuarial valuation.

The Elements of an ARC. Given the focus on ARCs, I want to explain the elements of the City's ARC.

In 2006, based on Cheiron's recommendation, the SDCERS Board agreed that the $1.2 billion 2007 unfunded actuarial liability (UAL) would be amortized over 20 years with no negative amortization. That shortened the amortization period for this UAL from its then" 27 years. Because of the shorter time frame for paying it off, it had the effect of increasing the annual amount of the City's future ARC payments. I n addition to this change, the Board also voted to amortize any future gains and losses over 15 years. Gains and losses are calculated on experience factors that include investment returns, inflation and member behaviors (e.g., pay, retirement, mortality, turnover and disability).

The City's FY 2009 ARC (paid on July 1, 2008) was $161.7 million, and it was made up of two amounts: (1) the nonnal cost, $68.6 million (the present value of benefits allocated to the current year), and (2) an amortization payment, $93.1 million, to pay off the $1.2 billion UAL as of June 30, 2007.

The City's FY 2010 ARC (payable on July 1, 2009) will be made up of: (1) the normal cost, (2) an amortization payment to pay off the 2007 UAL, and (3) the amortization of any June 30, 2008 gain or loss. We will know these numbers when Cheiron presents the City's June 30, 2008 Valuation on December 19, 2008.

The City's FY 2011 ARC (payable on July I, 2010) will reflect results of SDCERS' current fiscal year that concludes on June 30, 2009. It will be made up of: (1) the nonnal cost, (2) another amortization payment to pay off the 2007 UAL, (3) an amortization payment based on June 30, 2008 gains or losses, and (4) an amortization payment based on June 30, 2009 gains or losses.

This amortization process continues into the future with, I hope, more gains than losses.

Disclosure of Pension Issues. As has been well-documented, the City's pension problems first came to light in 2003 because of disclosures - or the lack thereof- in City bond offering documents. Fortunately, lessons were learned: the City and SDCERS have worked together to ensure comprehensive and accurate disclosure of S DCERS' information in all financial documents. As an example, the City's financial staff asked SDCERS to review disclosures in its water bond preliminary official statement (POS) 000034 that relate to SDCERS. We did, and Mark Hovey, SDCERS' Chief Financial Officer, has signed a certification concerning their accuracy. This is a best practice.

Jay Goldstone, the City's Chief Operating Officer, also has asked about the impact of the current financial markets and the impact of a significant investment loss on the City's future ARCs. Again, SDCERS responded by providing our best estimate of the impact. That input is reflected in the "Retirement" section and Table V of the. City's Five-Year Financial Outlook. J am proud of the positive and professional relationship SDCERS' staff has with the City's management team and the Office of the Independent Budget Analyst.

Conclusion

San Diego, like every other governmental entity in the United States, is in a very difficult financial situation because of the current economy. The economy's impact on your retirement plan is just one of the many budget components you have to manage.

In finding solutions to these issues, our community cannot continue to see them as "us" versus "them." We must recognize that these issues are "ours" not "theirs." We also need a return to civil dialogue and civility in dealing with one another. S erious issues

T^/ii !*?-*» C^t-if^tlO Hi(rh/-*noci*">tiC or»H "fri^ir tnTict rt/^r*»iT- i n o fVn-viirt-l-il-fiil *»»^*H ·- o^w-iii^t-fi*! ·**-* o*-»*·»&*- A wt^Ul* w k_i^X l\J K*.K> *-A*i-,IWt*»jLj*\JiX.J, kUA.U UJ V j LUU-LJ t OVWUJ J-A-i t* l-i-AVJ U£,XJ LI UX LUllA 1 WO LJ ^ O tl IV1 1_J_1(JJ-LU.Wl . Finally, we can all better respond to these difficult economic issues if policy makers rely on calculations and forecasts that are based on accurate data. SDCERS will continue to communicate and cooperate with the City during these exceptionally difficult times to assist you in making sound policy decisions while ensuring SDCERS' future security. guv^zr n/if/a? ^1

000035

San Diego City Employees' Retirement System

Report to the San Diego City Council November 19. 2008

David B. Wescoe AOminittrarcr/CEO

SBCERS Introduction

1. Historical Context

2. SDCERS' FY 2009 Year-to-Date Investment Performance

3. Future impact of SDCERS' Investment Retums on the City's ARC

SDCERS Historical Context

"Fears regarding the long-term prosperity of the n ation's many sound c ompanies make no sense...over the long term, the M stock market news will be good."

Warren Buffett The New York Times OctoDerlT, 2008 000036

SDCERS Historical Context ITl?t3Ht?---!l"!!.'!r!!'ffll'.'ll

SDCERS' Investment Strategy - Long-term Focus - Well-diveraified Portfolio - Disciplined investment Strategy - Adherence to Investment Policy

SDCERS Historical Context l-'l ;'l-.H!"-'Ji.'L- V1--I SDCERS' Cumulative 20-Year Performance

SDCERS I.'.I;. .J.-J./.S: Historical Context

For the ten years ended June 30, 2008, SDCERS' investment performance ranked ahead of 96% of other public pension funds.

Source; Callan Associates 000037

^^HMH^^^ B SDCERS SOGERS' FY 2009 Investment Performance

Now, as for today...

"The financial world is a mess, both in the United States and abroad."

Warren Buffett The New York Times October 17. 2008

SDCERS SDCERS' FY 2009 Investment Performance

^ ^ It is important to keep in mind that the market downturn we have experienced since July 1, bad as it is, reflects just over one quarter of SDCERS' four-quarter fiscal 2009 year.

SDCERS SDCERS' FY 2009 Investment Performance

Q1 - ended September 30, 2008 -10.1%

I'.'T Q2 - ending December 31, 2008 —% stiC

| ., Q3 - ending March 31. 2009 —-% '0

4'Jf Q4 - ending June 30, 2009 —% U 000038

SDCERS l' i.;i.;ii!-.-^,.'.j-."i.y.J SOGERS' FY 2009 Investment Performance

So, it is too early to tell what im pact investment results since July 1, 2008 will have on SDCERS or the City.

SDCERS SDCERS" Investment Retums and the ARC

· Investment Year: July 1.2006 - June 30. 2007

· Investment Return: +16.25%

· Cit/s ARC Payment: $161.7 million

· Payment Due Date: July 1.2008

· Impact to City's FY2009 Budget Paid in Full

mm SDCERS' Investment Retums and the ARC Hr^'' Fiscal Year 2010

Sp^! · Investment Year: July 1. 2007-June 30. 200B · Investment Return: -4.66% m7"' · City's ARC Payment: TBA-12/19/08

· Payment Due Date: July 1.2009 CfE'N P · Impactto City's FY2010 Budget TBA-12/19/08 000039

^^^^^^m^m m SDCERS I S DCERS' Investment Retums and the ARC

Fiscal Year 2011

· investment Year: July 1. 2008 - June 30, 2009

· Investment Return: —%

· City's ARC Payment: TBA - Dec 2009

· Payment Due Date: July 1,2010

· Impact to City's FY2011 Budget TBA - Dec 2009

SDCERS H T T-1'JH — VI - ·· ·— -··1 SDCERS' Investment Retums and the ARC

Investment retums are only one of many variables in a complex actuarial picture

SDCERS SDCERS' Investment Retums and the ARC

· Other variables can offset negative investment retums, including favorable experience in: - Inflation - Disability - Termination - Active mortality - Salary increase rates C00040

SDCERS Elements of the City's ARC l-T.-™---J"..—TWl For Fiscal Year 2009

i'AmortizationiPayment^of1 :juhe:3d.l2067iUAL V.'. :v'i$93f1fnii

· i Normal Cost ' i

TOTAL $161.7 m

SDCERS Elements of the City's ARC For Fiscal Year 2010

TOTAL $ m

SDCERS Elements of the City's ARC For Fiscal Year 2011

TOTAL $ m 000041

mmm^^^m^mm SDCERS W. SDCERS' Investment Retums and the ARC

Since 1990, of the 18 periods from October 31 through the following June 30,14 periods showed market gains. We hope this historical trend continues.

If it doesn't, the City's FY 2011 ARC, payable on July 1, 2010, may reflect a significant increase as reflected in the City's Five-Year Financial Outlook (FY 2011 Forecast, Scenario 2).

SDCERS

Thank You 000043 !3HT>6£T h/lffoZ dh(

SDCERS State Street Report 31-Oct-08

Fund Name Net Asset Value PIMCO $ 349,091,496.64 Metropolitan West Management Company $ 324,589,904.10 TCW Asset Management $ .291,494,656.71 Dodge & Cox $ 287,521,528.40 Brandes $ 239,718,871.21 McKinley $ 232,318,428.16 The RREEF Funds $ 219,577,877.82 Rogge Global Partners $ 150,857,935.61 intech · $ 144.141,925.64 Delta Asset Mgt $ 143,315,048.88 TCW Mid Cap Value $ 140,021,958.52 Globeflex $ 138,384,071.75 Salus Capital $ 129,270,055.02 Fidelity Mgmt $ 123,361,645.10 Inveso Realty Advisors $ 112,356,239,56 SSI-Defensive $ 112,233,056.82 Nicholas Applegate $ 111,019,942.10 Reef Reits $ 79,527,704.58 DFA Small Cap $ 72,366,655.17 Fisher Investments $ 69,400,564.64 Wall Street $ 67,730,990.18 Putnam OTC $ 66,426,784.77 Globeflex $ 55,631,554.11 GMO & Company, LLC $ 48,404,357.60 Cre Hotel Fund $ 24,713,640.62 COLONY CAPITAL - REAL ESTATE $ 15,579,059.63 Cash $ 12,939,128.90 CAPMARK REALTY $ 7,800,333.01 CA SMART GROWTH $ 7,483,901,52 PYRAMIS(Fidelity) Real Estate $ 4,766,998.62 Putnam Small Cap $ 37,273.08 Nicholas Applegate Cap. Mgnf. $ 24,240.92 Putnam Growth $ 9,603.95

$ 3,782,117,433.34 000045

EXECUTIVE SUMMARY of the- INVESTMENT MANAGER STRUCTURE ANALYSIS Prepared for San Diego City Employees' Retirement System .June 2008

Callan Associates Inc. (CAI), prepared the following statistical analysis utilizing secondare data from statements provided by the plan actuary, trustee, and/or custodian. CAI also used CAI computer software, selected information in CAl's database, and other computer software. CAI d isclaims responsibility, financial or otherwise, for the accuracy or completeness of any secondary data used in preparing this report.

Executive Summary

Callan Associates evaluates the c urrent structure of i nvestment managers and strategies employed by SDCERS in the domestic equity, international equity and domestic fixed income segments of the investment portfolio. The purpose of the study is to fully understand the characteristics and potential risks of the portfolio, to evaluate the effectiveness of the current set of manager structures, and to identify potential improvements or reasonable alternatives to the current structures

Domestic Equity Manager Structure Analysis

In the following analysis, Callan A ssociates evaluates the current structure of managers employed by SDCERS in the domestic equity portfolio. The objective is to identify a set of efficient alternative structures that represent either, potential improvements or reason^tt alternatives to the current structure. The purpose of the study is to fully u nderstand the characteristics and potential risks of the portfolio. Based on a wealth of financial research and practice, the factors considered are style exposure (core, growth and value), market capitalization, and active management. The analysis proceeds along three lines:

1. Evaluate the current weighting to the large, mid and small cap mandates compared to that of the broad market benchmark. Is the current smaller cap orientation reasonable?

2. Within each of the three capitalization ranges, evaluate the current strategy for employing investment managers with different investment styles. Are growth and value balanced to reduce uncompensated excess volatility? How many managers are necessary to fulfill the strateav?

3. Is there a place for low-cost and minimal tracking error market exposures provided by passive and/or enhanced passive managers?

We analyze portfolio characteristics to complement our knowledge of the individual investment managers in our examination of the current position and the exploration of potential alternative manager structures. We compare the current structure against the broad market benchmark and five alternative structures with varying allocations to different levels of capitalizations, styles and allocations to active management.

Conclusions and Observations

1. The current SDCERS target domestic equity allocation has an intended overweight to small and mid capitalization ("cap") stocks. The current structure of the broad market is

84% large cap; 8% mid cap, and 8% small'cap. SDCERS has 60% large cap 20% mid cap and 20% small cap. Over long periods of time, mid and small cap have provided higher returns than large cap as compensation for the additional amount of volatility experienced by mid and small cap stocks. In addition, active mid and small cap 000048

managers tend to outperform their respective indices by amounts measurably in excess of their,fees. SDCERS has determined that it can tolerate this additional volatility in order to earn the compensation for the extra volatility and the additional return from active management.

SDCERS may want to consider reducing the allocation to mid and small cap given that there have also been long historical periods during which mid and small cap stocks have underperformed large cap stocks. The concern is that the small and mid cap orientation may be removed after significant loses by the small and mid cap markets generally and the SDCERS managers in particular. Removing the orientation would "lock in': these losses and not allow them to be offset by the following mid and small cap rally.

SDCERS should consider keeping the mid and small cap overweights if they believe: · The overweight can be maintained through a long cycle of mid and small cap underperformance. · Mid and small cap stocks will outperform large cap over the long run. · · SDCERS can identify active mid and small cap managers who will outperform their benchmarks after fees.

Without these convictions, our analysis suggests that a cap weighting closer to that of the broad market would be more appropriate than the current structure. Given the strong performance of small and mid cap stocks over the past decade, SDCERS may also consider slightly reducing the magnitude of the small cap orientation.

2. Over the long run, value and growth styles provide similar retums regardless of capitalization. If this is the case, overweighting one of the styles at the expense of the other will result in the same long-term return but this return will be earned with greater volatility. SDCERS has integrated this philosophy into the current structure by assigning equal dollar weights to growth and value managers in each capitalization. Our analy3is shows that there is currently a growth orientation to the portfolio in spite of this structure. TCW Concentrated Core has growth characteristics that are more pronounced than the growth index while Dodge & Cox has value characteristics that are less pronounced than the large cap value index. While it may be possible to offset this orientation by providing a larger dollar allocation to Dodge & Cox at the expense of TCW, it would be difficult to determine exactly how to allocate the assets given that the style exposures of these managers vary with time. A better solution is to dilute the style exposures by adding an additional growth manager and an a dditional value manager. This a pproach also addresses the current concentration of assets in these two managers. Each of them currently has a target of 20% of the equity assets or about $360 million. Although we respect each of these organizations, even the best investment management firms can experience portfolio manager turnover or an underperformance due to a temporarily out- of-favor strategy. TCW runs a "concentrated" portfolio which can often contain fewer than 30 stocks. While this can be an effective strategy and add excess return over time, underperformance by just a few stocks can have a significant impact on T CW's performance as well as the performance of the equity portfolio as a whole. 000549

Diversification here may be particularly useful even if it is with another concentrated manager .

3. A passive manager is one that holds all of the stocks of an index at the same weights as they are held in the index. Passive managers provide the same retums as the index before fees are subtracted. Passive management fees are often just a few basis points. Enhanced passive managers deviate slightly from index weightings in an attempt to add some excess returns while closely following the performance of the index. Enhanced passive fees lie between passive fees and fees charged by most active managers. Passive and enhanced passive managers are often used for markets that are "efficient" meaning that these markets are so well researched and understood that there is little likelihood that active managers can uncover information that they can exploit to earn retums over the index. The large cap US equity market is considered an efficient market and most large institutions have at least some passive and/or enhanced passive large cap.

The case for adding passive or enhanced passive management to the SDCERS portfolio is not strong. SDCERS has a history of finding active large cap core managers that outperform the market. SDCERS has negotiated the fees of its core active managers down to the point where they are comparable to enhanced passive managers. SDCERS may want to consider passive management if the core portion of the portfolio is expanded beyond the capacity of the active core managers or to reduce the complexity of the porriblio if additional style-specific managers are hired. 000050

Imemational Equity Manager Structure Analysis

Callan Associates has conducted a review of the international equity manager structure for SDCERS. Callan reviewed the manager lineup within the international equity portfolio and suggests alternative portfolio structures that address the following basic issues:

1. What is the role of international equity in the total fund?

2. Is the current structure sufficient to satisfy this role? Does it provide well-diversified exposure to the international equity market with no unintended biases? If the current structure is not sufficient, what changes could be made to better serve the role of international equity in the total fund? What should.be the role of emerging markets and small cap?

3. How should the assets be divided up among strategies and individual manager mandates? How many managers are required to implement the international equity portfolio, and are the current managers appropriate for their assigned mandates?

SDCERS pursues a total return strategy in the investment of plan assets. Within a total return strategy, international equity is typically a complement to domestic equity in the total equity portion of the fund, where the plan seeks long term capital appreciation and exploits the expected higher return for equity over fixed income.

The current international equity portfolio, which amounts to $820 million (about 17% of total plan assets), consists of four managers. Brandes and McKinley provide predominantly large cap developed markets exposure. Each manager is permitted to opportunistically invest up to 30% of their portfolios in emerging markets. GMO and GlobeFlex are international small cap managers. This review confirms that, in aggregate, while SDCERS' current international equity portfolio provides broad exposure to the international market. We suggest SDCERS consider two issues:

1. Should the international equity portfolio have a broad market oriented exposure? This core exposure would be designed to maintain the international "beta" which provides diversification to the entire portfolio while still allowing for value to be added by the benchmark agnostic and small cap managers. This broad market exposure could be implemented passively or with a core plus mandate.

2. Should SDCERS have a strategic allocation to emerging markets rather than its current opportunistic allocation? This is not an "either/or" question as both approaches may be combined, whereby the current managers are continued to be pennitted to use emerging markets in an opportunistic (perhaps limited) way and a separate allocation is also funded.

The analysis Callan performed'looked at the issue from a number of perspectives. First, we looked at the composition of the markets based on widely used international benchmarks. 000051

Next, we laid out our "clean sheet of paper" approach. This is the structure that we would recommend for a new allocation to international equity. These structures are based on the existing composition of international markets and the range of available strategies based on relative levels of volatility.

Finally we looked at potential combinations of strategies the SDCERS might use. We describe the motivations for these strategies and compare their levels of volatility and excess returns with the current SDCERS structure.

We conclude that SDCERS' current portfolio is reasonable from our perspective and efficiently implemented. It provides broad market coverage with a small number of managers. I t allows each manager significant latitude to add value beyond the index returns. Each of the four managers supplies contrasting styles of investing creating good diversification in a cost-effective. manner. SDCERS has shown the ability to tolerate the volatility above that provided by alternatives which include allocations to passive, enhanced passive, core or core plus managers. SDCERS has generally been rewarded for the extra volatility taken. Should SOGERS want to reduce the volatility relative to the market, passive, core plus or both types of strategies can be used. 000052

Domestic Fixed Income Manaaer Structure Analysis

In the following analysis, Callan Associates will evaluate the current structure of managers employed by SDCERS in the domestic fixed income portfolio. The objective is to identify a set of efficient alternative structures that represent potential improvements over the current structure. Improvements are defined as changes that better align the characteristics and potential risk and return of the portfolio with the goals, expectations and risk tolerance of the System. The SDCERS fixed income portfolio is different from the typical public fund, with allocations to convertible bonds and market neutral equities. The primary questions to address are (1) whether this structure is reasonable, (2) what are the goals for adding each of the non-core mandates, and if these goals are being met, and (3) are there other risk-adjusted return-enhancing strategies SDCERS should consider.

The analysis addresses three primary issues:

1. The role and appropriateness of convertible bonds within SDCERS' fixed income portfolio 2. The role and appropriateness of market neutral equity within SDCERS' fixed income portfolio 3. Consideration of alternative fixed income strategies within the portfolio

We analyze the fixed income portfolio's risk and return patterns to complement our knowledge of the individual investment managers in our examination of the. current position and the exploration of potential alternative manager structures. While we collect and analyze holdings- based portfolio characteristics for each of the fixed income managers, five of the six manager^ follow investment philosophies that employ strategies and securities that are different from those in a typical market bond portfolio. As a result, the a nalysis of t ypical bond portfolio characteristics such as duration, quality and sector that are applied to more traditional portfolios as less useful for this analysis.

To address the issue of convertible bonds, we compare the current structure against the broad market benchmark to determine whether convertibles have contributed to the fixed income portfolio, and the sources of their contribution. In particular, we ask whether the contribution from convertibles comes from the unique nature of the mandate and/or the skill of the individual manager, and what purpose convertibles serve within the total fixed income portfolio. We also review the purpose and intent of making a strategic allocation to market neutral equity, the strategy's impact on total fixed income portfolio performance, and possible alternative uses for the strategy. Finally, we discuss the advantages and disadvantages to several of the various institutional fixed income strategies not currently employed by SDCERS.

Underlying this structure analysis is the understanding that SDCERS wishes to better understand the role each of the three strategies plays in the total fixed income portfolio, and to rationalize the number of managers relative to the size of the portfolio and to the individual mandates. 000053

Observations and Conclusions

1. The current strategy for the fixed income portfolio includes a target allocation of 60% to core plus, 30% to a market neutral strategy, and 10% to convertible bonds. The SDCERS total fixed income portfolio is therefore different from that of a typical public pension fund of comparable size. Within Callams data base, fewer than 10% of public funds have dedicated convertible bond strategies or market neutral within their fixed income portfolios.

2. The starting point of Callan's typical fixed income structure analysis, based primarily on how the asset class is modeled in the asset/liability framework, is the assumption that the total fixed income structure should be neutral to the broad market, as represented by the Lehman Aggregate Bond Index. Neutrality in this case is primarily defined as the duration range a.id secondarily as the credit quality. An alternative structure is reasonable if the investor can articulate the goal for this positioning and the role for each piece of the portfolio, particularly those that are responsible for the difference.

3. The convertible bond portfolio has generated an equity-like return over the past ten years, and has boosted SDCERS' total fixed income returns while maintaining a comparable level of risk. The convertible portfolio has also exhibited equity-like volatility and correlation to the bond market, and the contribution to the total fixed income return and risk accrues from diversifying between siouks and bonds. Given that the SDCERS overali asset allocation is conservative relative to its peers - total equity is 54% versus a 63% median allocation for public plans - the use of convertibles at low levels to enhance returns to the fixed income portfolio may be reasonable. We would also continue to expect the volatility of retu/i;:: relative to the broad fixed income market -tracking error - to be higher.

4. The objective of the market neutral equity program has been to provide shorter duration (or defensive) bond-like retums and volatility with very low correlation to the rest of the SDCERS portfolio. The program has delivered on the promise of low volatility and diversification, but has not met the objective as it pertains to return expectations. This result can be explained both by the poor performance of market neutral equity in the declining interest rate environment during the first half of the current decade, as well as by mediocre to poor relative performance by some of SDCERS' managers.

5. Given the recent market environment for market neutral equity, we believe a case can be made to support the continuation of the program. Higher short-term interest rates shoujd benefit the retums for these strategies. As rates rose starting in 2005, the market neutral program enhanced the return of the total fixed income portfolio. The Board and Staff will have to decide whether the comfort level with the current managers warrants a continued assignment, or if alternative managers should be identified.

6. Alternatively, SDCERS may want to consider using the market neutral equity program as a source of "portable alpha" for the portfolio. In this scenario, SDCERS would securitize the large cash components of the market neutral managers, thereby changing the cash-like return underlying the strategies into one that mimics either the stock or the bond market. A 000054 "bondized" strategy would overlay the alpha generated by the long/short market neutral equity exposure with either-a futures or swap position in market duration bonds. The potential advantage to this "hondized" market neutral program would be enhanced return for the total fixed income portfolio over longer-term periods. In an environment where the fixed income market is yielding less than 5%, the potential of enhanced retums is strongly worth considering.

7. Finally, depending on SDCERS' goal for the total fixed income portfolio (lower-risk anchor to windward versus higher-risk return generator), additional investment strategies (high yield, long bonds, TIPS) could be considered. jg^p^-er n/w/e % 4^1 000055

THE CITY OF SAN DIEGO MEMORANDU M

DATE: November 19, 2008

TO: Members of the City Council

FROM: Nader Tirandazi, Financial Management Director

SUBJECT: Response to Budget Inquiries

On Wednesday, November 12, 2008. the City Council's Budget and Finance Committee met to review and discuss the budget adjustments recommended in the Fiscal Year 2009 Budget Amendment Report (#08-166). During the meeting, several Councilmembers requested additional information. The responses to those inquiries are included below.

r\ .*-:—. Council member Faulconer -What is the process, timing and steps for implementing a mandatory furlough? Can negotiations be opened just for one item?

Response: Under MMBA (California Government Code sec. 3504, et seq.), a mandatory furlough would impact both wages and hours, thereby being subject to negotiation prior to implementation, and as such, mandatory furlough cannot be imposed on the unions during the current contract year (FY09). Terms and conditions of employment in a collective bargaining agreement are fixed for the duration of the agreement, unless the parties agree otherwise {Glendale City Employees' Assn., Inc. v. City of Glendale, (19.75) 15 Cal.3d 328). Therefore, the City could not implement the proposed changes prior to the expiration of the current contract(s), which is June 30, 2009. The City could invite the labor unions to negotiate over mandatory furlough during the current fiscal year, but cannot impose it. If the unions refuse to negotiate, the City must wait until the next fiscal year to raise the issue again.

Yes, upon mutual agreement of both the City and the labor union(s) negotiations can be opened for one item. The City would need to contact the labor unions and ask them to open negotiations for mandatory furlough during the current fiscal year. If they agree, we proceed to the meet and confer process which would take approximately one month. Page 2 Response to Budget Inquiries November 19, 2008 000056 Question: Councilmember Faulconer - What are the impacts on CCDC projects from the increase of the Petco Park repayment to $11.3 million and the original $7.5 million budgeted? Can CCDC projects be put on hold? Response: Please refer to the a ttached memorandum from Center City Development Corporation (Attachment I) detailing the impacts to the Agency.

Question: Councilmember Faulconer - What new facilities are being built and can any be postponed to mitigate future operating budget impacts?

Response: The City has the ability to terminate design and construction contracts at any point in the work process. However, terminations of contracts for convenience generally have significant cost impacts that would have to be evaluated.

Library: The only Library facility under construction is the new Logan Heights Branch scheduled to open

Additionally, 4.95 FTE ($374,456) is required for operating the new branch. This is a joint-use project with San Diego City Schools and additional funding has been provided through State grants.

The Mission Hills, Kensington-Normal Heights, San Carlos and Skyline branches are in the earlier stages of planning and design, but no construction has begun on these projects. Both the Mission Hills Branch and the Skyline Branch have donations to assist with construction, although the donor for the Skyline Hills Branch has indicated that the $5 million donation will expire at the end of the year if progress is not made on that library. Fund raising activities are ongoing for the New Central Library.

Additional information regarding Park & Recreation facilities will be provided as soon as it becomes available. Page 3 Response to Budget Inquiries November 19.2008 000057 Question: Councilmember Faulconer-What are the upcoming BPRs and associated cost savings? Response: The following table provides the current status of BPRs underway or being initiated.

BPR Status Reservoir Recreation Targeting the December 2, 2008 docket for Council review/approval of recommendations Publishing Services In Meet & Confer Facilities Maintenance In Meet & Confer Environmental Services: Pending Meet & Confer Collections Park Maintenance Pending Meet & Confer Streets Pending Meet & Confer Custodial Services Pending Meet & Confer Airports Division BPR underway Communications Division BPR report being finalized City-wide Delivery BPR effort expected to kick off soon

Question: Councilmember Faulconer- Define a temporary reduction versus a long-term budget cut.

Response: All the Fiscal Year 2009 proposed budget reductions have been included in the Five-Year Financial Outlook. The Outlook provides a financial projection of the impact of the budget cuts but is not a policy document. Approximately $16.7 million in personnel reductions and $17 million in non-personnel reductions are assumed in the Outlook from Fiscal Years 2010 to 2014.

The Outlook is revised as economic conditions change, as revenue projections are modified and when the Council makes budgetary and appropriation decisions. The closing of parks and libraries in the short-terra is a policy decision and is based on the City receiving additional revenues. Those additional revenues have not been identified.

Question: Councilmember Hueso - What is the accounting information for the blue level swim program? What other funds could be used for this purpose (such as RZH and EDCO)?

Response: The estimated annual personnel cost for the blue level swim program is $39,911 with the associated revenue estimated at $4,500. The competitive level swim team operated at Memorial Pool is eligible for restoration through the use of EDCO fund monies, which is currently Page 4 Response to Budget Inquiries oMti 19,2008 estimated at $435,000. However, the program at City Heights is not eligible for EDCO funds. All other eligible park bond funds have been allocated and are not available.

Question: Councilmember Hueso - What are the rules on use of Council Infrastructure Funds? Can Infrastructure Funds be used to keep/maintain services and programs?

Response: As part of the Mayor's proposed budget amendments, the total balance of unallocated Infrastructure Funds has been incorporated in the corrective actions. For additional information on the guidelines for the use of these funds, please refer to the memorandum issued by the Office of the Comptroller.

Question: Councilmember Hueso - What is the possibility of entering into agreements with tenants (partnership) to keep community service centers open?

Response: Due to the fact that this work has been traditionally done by Civil Service Employees, the only opportunity to legally contract the work with outside vendors would be through the Managed VÛlllpCLJlujii i lugiam. IL ia ii'i.im.uiii'iiiiû mai 1111^ ûy rtviwinx^y ajiujj^v m^ !·-£,«* n-iÛlTSmSIllS related to contracting out and provide the City with options.

Question: Councilmember Madaffer - What are the potential savings for contracting out of criminal prosecution to the district attorney's office?

Response: This request has been referred to the City Attorney for response.

Question: Councilmember Frye - What is the status of May 07, 2008 Memo from Jay Goldstone regarding cost recovery for services (i.e. Contracts with Qualcomm Stadium, Aztec Games, Petco Park, and Fire/EMS services provided to Universities). How m uch money is currently being recovered and how much is planned on being recovered in FY10?

Response: Cost recovery for all eligible services will be evaluated and presented to Council as part of the User Fee Policy. Page 5 Response to Budget Inquiries November 19, 2008 0 fuestion: Councilmember Frye — What is the cost of the beach grooming program?

Response: Elimination of the beach grooming function would discontinue the year-round functions of raking, and screening of sand as well as kelp removal. Reduction in these services would eliminate 5.00 Equipment Operator IPs ($394,688), 4.00 Heavy Truck Driver Vs ($307,162) and non-personnel costs ($355,607) annually, for a total of $3.0 million.

Question: Councilmember Frye - What projects would be impacted by waiver of the Mission Bay Ordinance?

Response: Projects impacted by waiving the Mission Bay Ordinance are reflected in Table 1. This table details the projects that were programmed for the Mission Bay Improvement Fund and the Regional Park Improvement Fund for Fiscal Year 2009.

Question: Councilmember Young - What is the status of the Tourism Marketing District (TMD)? iûii m^j r int.! t,aa\, luiiumg ivj ui gamâiiuiia a im wnaci îiy 1U11US.

Response: The Council does not have the authority to alter the TMD budget in order to offset City expenses.

Question: Councilmember Young — How much could regionalizing Fire Academies save the City?

Response: Currently there are no county-wide standards for providing a basic fire academy and ongoing training to new fire recruits. The State of California has basic requirements for accredited fire academies or ongoing training, but the standards are broad and are delivered quite differently statewide. These differences affect even the college based academies that currently take place in San Diego County. Unlike the Peace Officer Standards and Training (POST) training designed and delivered by the State for police agencies, the state curriculum for fire academies is neither transportable nor accepted state-wide. The department is moving towards a regionalized approach, but it will take time without a county fire agency.

In order to keep the San Diego Fire-Rescue Department (SDFD) high standards in place, we would need direct influence on any new regional fire academy curriculum and the testing process. SDFD has conducted several fire academies where new recmits from other fire departments have participated and graduated. Page 6 Response to Budget Inquiries November 19,2008

Trrregards to cost savings, preliminary discussions indicate there would be minimal savings from a regionalized training approach; however, there is merit in the regionalized concept but primarily as a method to work and train more inter-dependently with other agencies.

Question: Councilmember Young - Is the Beckwourth Library on college property' and could a joint- use arrangement be achieved with the college?

Response: The Mountain View/Beckwourth Branch is on San Diego Community College property at the Educational Cultural Complex (ECC). A joint-use agreement exists requiring the City pays operational expenses including but not limited to utilities, supplies, maintenance, personnel, and books and periodicals for public use; however, this is subject to budgetary limitations as may be imposed by the City.

Question: Councilmember Young - What would be the cost savings if the Administrative Leave Program was eliminated for directors?

Response: Administrative leave is designed to be used in the year it is granted and is not eJigibie for pay-in- lieu. The annual allotment of hours does not carry forward from one year to another. As such, there are no direct savings by eliminating the benefit.

Question: Councilmember Young - What is the cost associated with vehicles that public safety executives take home?

Response: The Police and Fire-Rescue Departments provide personally assigned vehicles to senior officers due to the requirement to respond to incidents and emergencies 24 hours a day. The General Services Department charges the departments per month per vehicle for the operation and maintenance expense of the vehicles. Regardless of whether the vehicles are taken-home, the departments will always realize a usage charge.

Question: Councilmember Young - Is it possible for non-profit organizations to operate facilities that are proposed for closure?

Response: Due to the fact that this work has been traditionally done by Civil Service Employees, the only opportunity to legally contract the work with outside vendors would be through the Managed Competition Program. It is recommended that the City Attorney analyze the legal requirements related to contracting out and provide the City with options. Page 7 Response to Budget Inquiries November 19,2008 000061 Question: Councilmember Young -What is the General Fund's obligation regarding the Local 127 settlement?

Response: The Fiscal Year 2009 expense is estimated to be $1 million in the General Fund.

Question: Council President Peters - Why close both Clairemont and South UC Libraries considering their proximity to each other?

Response: There are a number of libraries in the areas of the Clairemont and University communites. Circulation and patron counts have been dropping significantly since the opening of the new North University Community Branch, indicating that many previous patrons and residents of University Community (South) prefer to visit the new, larger branch located within the Nobel Athletic Field. The North University Community Branch Library provides library users with ample parking, more computers, and a meeting room.

The Clairemont Branch Library is located three miles from the North Clairemont and Balboa Branch Libraries, and four miles from the Pacific Beach Branch. The Clairemont Branch is the smallest in terms of building and collection size, has limited parking, and has no meeting room.

Question: Council President Peters - What fee structure is required to make the Jr. Lifeguard Program fully cost recoverable?

Response: At current funding levels, the Junior Lifeguard Program is not fully cost recoverable. After researching the Junior Lifeguard Program fee structure, it was learned that overhead costs were not part of the structure.

Within the Junior Lifeguard Program, there are on average 920 paying students and 130 scholarship students. The current tuition of $400 covers most of the costs associated with personnel expenses and non-personnel expenses, as well as the costs of providing scholarships.

The Fire-Rescue Department is prepared to modify the program to reflect current financial guidelines and has identified the necessary changes needed to make the junior Lifeguard Program fully cost recoverable. The list below summarizes the changes:

· New model based on the same number of paying students and scholarships · Overhead costs are now part of this model · Tuition increase to $500 · Decrease of one week of instructor time assigned to the program · Decrease of the length of the program (currently 4 weeks) by two to four days - still TBD PageS Response to Budget Inquiries November 19, 2008 000062 · Organization Effectiveness Specialist III position overlooking the program will be transformed from "full time" to "limited" status · Non-personnel expenses decrease by $64,745 to a total of $60,000 · These changes will accomplish the full savings identified in the reduction of the Organization Effectiveness Specialist III by eliminating its cost for one-half year and adding revenue for one- half year.

Question: Council President Peters - What is the cost to maintain a library each year if a sponsor became available?

Response: This information was provided in the addendum to the Fiscal Year 2009 Budget Amendment Report (Attachment IX).

Question: Councilmember Atkins - How many people are in the DROP Program; how many people are going to retire in the next 5 years; how will the reduction in the academies impact staffing?

Response: Police: Currently the Department has 60.00 civilian personnel and 204.00 sworn personnel enrolled as Deferred Retirement Option Program (DROP) participants, (not including command staff). The number of swom personnel required to leave each year based on their respective DROP agreements are as follows.

FY 2009 - 21.00 - monthly average remaining for Fiscal Year 2009 = 3.00 FY 2010 - 52.00 - monthly average = 4.30 FY 201.1 - 44.00 - monthly average = 3.60 FY 2012 - 37.00-monthly average = 3.10 FY 2013 - 50.00 - monthly average = 4.20

The Department has used an average monthly attrition rate of 9.00 sworn personnel to calculate the impact of lowering academy enrollment to 25.00. The attrition rate of 9.00 personnel includes DROP participants, medical retirees, academy and training attrition and losses to other agencies.

Based on these assumptions, the Department will have a net loss of approximately 7.00 swom positions each of the next three fiscal years. The Department will analyze options to mitigate the net loss which could include increasing the enrollment numbers in one class each fiscal year, hiring graduates directly from other public safety academies throughout California or hiring transfers from other police departments within the State. Page 9 Response to Budget Inquiries · tvxmhar 19,2008

Fire-Rescue: Based on available infonnation from the Retirement Office, the following is a snapshot of swom employees who are currently in the DROP and those eligible to enter currently and by fiscal year.

Currently In DROP Eligible to Enter by FY- Totals Estimate Eligible Now 50 50 FY 2009 26 25 51 FY 2010 43 40 83 FY 2011 32 30 62 FY 2012 30 20 50 FY 2013 20 20 40' FY 2014 4 30 34 Totals 155 215 370

Recent reports reflect that Fire-Rescue has approximately 155 swom employees within DROP and 75 sworn employees eligible to enter the program or retire in Fiscal Year 2009.

In relation to fire academies, the department typically conducts two academies per year and enrolls approximately 30 recruits for each acarierny. Due to current fiscal constraints, it has been proposed to conduct one academy per year through Fiscal Year 2010. In Fiscal Year 2009, one academy will cover expected attrition; however, in Fiscal Year 2010 one academy will not quite cover the anticipated attrition of 43 swom employees. The department will utilize overtime to cover minimum staffing requirements. This will result in savings to the department due to the lower costs of using overtime versus hiring employees. Lastly, attrition rates could increase depending on the current economic climate and possible changes to future retirement or DROP benefit levels.

Question: Councilmember Atkins - What are some of the future State budget impacts?--

Response: Please refer to the attached memorandums from Jay Goldstone, COO and Job Nelson, Director of Intergovernmental Relations (Attachment II and III) describing the anticipated State budget impacts on the City.

Question: Councilmember Atkins - What are the impacts of Customer Service Department reductions on route slip responses?

Response: There are approximately 2,000 Route Slips processed each year. This service will be absorbed by existing staff in the Administration Department and the response time to process requests will be initially delayed until the staff acquires familiarity with the process. Page 10 Response to Budget Inquiries November 19,2008 000064 Question: Councilmember Atkins - What are the liability impacts from unsupervised skate parks?

Response: Please refer to the attached m emorandum which contains the City A ttorney's opinion (Attachment IV) on the liability assumed should the City skate parks become unsupemsed.

Question: Councilmember Atkins - What are the impacts from the State and federal mandates for the Storm Water positions? What are the penalties to t he City f or not meeting requirements?

Response: The primary impacts associated with the elimination of the ten (10.00) vacant Storm Water department positions are reductions in: · Storm Water pollution prevention public outreach and education activities · Inspections of industrial facilities . · Policy development and collaboration capability with agencies that regulate the City · Capability to promptly respond to storm water pollution prevention hotline calls and email inquiries

The City will remain in compliance with the Municipal Storm Water Permit issued by the California Regional Water Quality Control Board- San Diego Region (Regional Board) despite these reductions. The Regional Board is the State agency charged with the responsibility to enforce federal and State mandated water quality programs and regulations and could fine the City up to $10,000 per day for municipal permit violations.

Attachments: I. Center City Development Corporation Memorandum II. & III. State Budget Impacts on the City of San Diego IV. City Attorney Opinion on Unsupervised Skate Park Liability IV

cc: , Honorable Mayor Jerry Sanders Jay M. Goldstone, Chief Operating Officer Mary J. Lewis, Chief Financial Officer Andrea Tevlin, Independent Budget Analyst Page 11 Response to Budget Inquiries November 19,2008 000065 . Table 1

Fiscal Year 2009 Projects Funded by Mission Bay Lease Revenue

The following list reflects projects that were allocated in Fiscal Year 2009. Expenditures or project status is not listed. Prior year funding allocations or project status is also not included.

Mission Bay Park Improvement Fund Allocations for FY 2009 22-965.0 Annual Allocation - Mission Bay Improvements $76,802 22-968.0 Mariner's P oint Road C urbs and Parking Lot - $400,000 Improvements 22-969.0 Mission Bay Park Drinking Fountains - Replacement $150,000 22-970.0 Mission Point/Bayside W alk Security Lighting - $275,000 Upgrade 22-976.0 Sunset Point Parking Lot - Security Lighting $ 150.000 22-977.0 Vacation Isle N orth Cove P arking Lot - Security $150,000 Lighting 22-978.0 Vacation Isle North Cove Road Improvements $150,000 22-979.0 Vacation Isle Northeast Parking Lot Security Lighting $150,000 22-980.0 West Bonita Cove Children's Play Area Upgrades $200,000 22-966.0 West Ski Island - Shoreline Stabilization $500,000 22-972.0 North Crown Point Gazebo Replacement $265,000 Total Mission Bay Improvement Fund $2,466,802

Regional Park Improvement Fund Allocations for FY 2009 21-876:0 Balboa Park - Florida Canyon Evaluation and Repair of $1,000,000** Broken Storm Drain 21-877.0 Balboa Park - Marston Point Evaluation and Repair of $50,000 Collapsed Storm Drain 27-875.0 Balboa Park - Morley Field Evaluation and Repair of $50,000 Collapsed Storm Drain 21-870.0 Balboa Park - Myrtle Way Pergola $350,000 29-975.0 Crest Canyon Resource Management Plan * $75,000 29-974.0 Gonzalez Canyon Resource Management Plan * $200,000 29-966.0 Mission Trails Regional Park Cowles Mountain Trail $400,000 Rehabilitation * 29-967.0 Mission Trails Regional Park Trail Realignments $300,000 29-909.0 Regional Park Improvements $41,803 Total Regional Park Improvement Fund $2,466,803

* The Park and Recreation Department requests that these projects remain funded. ** The Park and Recreation Department requests that $275,000 of this $1,000,000 remain funded thtt* Centre City l-^t'^t--. , . Attachment LLLLt. Development LU0LL0L0 0C6o7rp oration

November 18, 2008

Mr. William Anderson Assistant Executive Director The Redevelopment Agency of the City of San Diego 1200 Third Avenue, Suite 1400, MS 56D San Diego, CA 92101-4110

Subject: Redevelopment Petco Park Payment

Dear Mr. Anderson;

In response to the question raised at the November 12, 2008 Special Joint Meeting regarding the Corporation increasing Agency payments to the City from $7.5 million to $11.3 million for the payment of debt service on the Ballpark Bonds, the following will be proposed to facilitate the payment and mitigate the impacts to Agency. Several actions will be required by the CCDC SGsrd, thv K-CdcvslopTTierit Agciucy Slid the City Council including*.

A Approval of an Amendment to the Ballpark Cooperation Agreement between the Redevelopment Agency and the City of San Diego to provide for payments for the debt service on the Ballpark Bonds.

B. Approval of a Repayment Agreement on the outstanding debt owed to the City. The agreement would outline scheduled payments to be made over the next thirteen years.

C. Adoption of findings by the Redevelopment Agency and the City Council that a) determine the Ballpark is a benefit to the Project Area; b) that there is no reasonable means to finance the debt service on the Ballpark Bonds; c) that the payments to be made will assist in the continuation of eliminating one or more blighting conditions within the project area; and d) that the expenditures to be made by the Agency is consistent with the Five Year Implementation plans for the Centre City Redevelopment Project Area.

D. Approval of a budget amendment to the Fiscal Year 2009 Budget to provide for an increase in die payments to the City from $7.5 million to $11.3 million.

The project activities in Fiscal Year 2009 will not be directly impacted. However, in Fiscal Years 2012 through 2016 current projections estimate a deficit of approximately $17 million which may be mitigated with short term financing and or a deferral of certain projects.

401 B Street, Suite 400 I San Diego, CA 92101-4298 I Phone 619-235-2200 I Fax 619-236-9148 ! www.ccdc.com O P rintedon ncyrledpoptr Mr. William Anderson November 18.2008 Page 2 of 2 CQ0068 It is anticipated that the above referenced documents will be brought forward to the CCDC Board and the Redevelopment Agency in January 2009. A public hearing associated with the findings and the Amendment to the Ballpark Cooperation Agreement will be required with the appropriate two week advanced advertising, and the availability of documents pertaining to the Ballparic Bond payments. If youunp Imve any questions, please advise.

Tank J. Alessi Vice President and Chief Financial officer

cc: Jay Goldstone, Chief Operating Officer Mary Lewis, Chief Financial Officer Nader Tirandazi, Financial Management Director Janice Weinrick, Deputy Executive Director CouciJmember Kevin Faulconer, City CouncfJ District 2 . Fred Maas, Chair - CCDC Board

S;\SaHten\MrFUHAniANiaLETTEBU00nANDEB5ON ll-ll-MCUoe Attachment II

000069 THE CITY OF SAN DIEGO MEMORANDU M

DATE: November 18, 2008

TO; Honorable Members of the City Council

FROM Jay M. Goldstone, Chief Operating Officer

SUBJECT: Possible State Budget Impacts on the City and Use of Reserves and One-Time Options to Cover Budget Deficit

On Wednesday November 12, 2008, the City Council held the first of two scheduled budget meetings to discuss the Mayor's recommended amendments to balance the City's Fiscal Year 2009 Budget. At that meeting I was asked by Councilmember Toni Atkins to report back to the Council on the likely impact the California budget deficit could have on the City budget deficit, and how the city might prepare for that eventuality.

The State is dealing with a budget deficit that is projected to grow to $28 billion, a record amount. This deficit has led state officials to consider raising the state sales tax, the state income tax and the Vehicle License Fee. Those revenue-enhancement proposals, which face strong opposition from Republican legislators, would not be enough to close the deficit and would also require across-the-board spending cuts. If history is any guide, the probabilities are high that the State will also seek to enhance its position at the expense of cities and counties.

San Diego's exposure to raids by the State is significant and presents potentially dire consequences this fiscal year, with the most probable scenarios being:

a) A loss of Prop 1A money. Theoretically, the state could "borrow" approximately $35 million from City sales tax and property tax revenues and repay the "loan" with interest, after three years. The state could then turn right around and borrow this money again for an additional three years.

b) A loss of Prop 42 money, which would not affect the General Fund, but could take approximately $11.1 million in Capital Improvement Programs. That would be a direct hit to our deferred maintenance programs for city streets in the amount of $2.2 million for slurry sealing and $8.9 million for overlay work. ...!!·:.·

c) A loss of various state grants and funds, such as COPS funds for Police Department positions. The City could also be impacted if the State withholds jail booking fee revenues the County now receives. This could change the financial relationship between the City and County, to the City's detriment.

d) No impact. This is the least anticipated scenario.

Given the State's predicament, the City cannot assume that it will not face another round of budget cuts prior to the end of this fiscal year. Such cuts, in response to State action, would be on top of the cuts Page 2 Honorable Members of the City Council November 18,2008 C00070 needed to close the current $43 million budget deficit and those needed to close the anticipated $44 million deficit in the Fiscal Year 2010 budget.

For that reason, it is crucial that the City Council does not delay implementation of the current round of budget cuts. The current projected savings was based upon a November 19th City Council decision and a January 1,2009 irapleraentation. It is estimated that staff will need approximately six weeks to go through the "reduction in force" and "meet and confer" processes. Each week of delay will require us to make an additional 5330,000 in cuts this fiscal year.

In addition to the threats from the state, San Diego, as with many cities throughout the State and nation, is dealing with the effects of an economy most of us have never had to face before. The recession has compounded the problem pointed out in the Five Year Financial Outlook: that for the foreseeable future the City is projected to spend more than it receives in revenues. For this reason, the City by increasing efficiencies has been able to cut costs in each of the past three fiscal years and has been discreet in how it spends its limited revenues to slowly right the ship. The Office of the Independent Budget Analyst has acknowledged this projected structural deficit that was outlined in the first Five Year Outlook and has suggested that the City must solve this problem.

Unfortunately this structural imbalance has been exacerbated by the current worldwide economic "' meltdown and unlike the terrorist attack of September 11 * or the dot.com bust at the turn of the century, this meltdown is deeper and more widespread and il will take the national and world economies much longer to recover. During the last two economic slowdowns, the economy was boosted by consumer spending and thus the recoveries were fairly rapid. As we have now learned more people were lent money to buy homes than should not have been, the prices of the homes were growing at an unusually rapid pace and consumers were using the.equityifl.thejr homes as check books and spending the equity to make big purchases. Now that the bubble has exploded consumer confidence has been shaken, spending is trending downward down and the recovery will be slow.

It is for these core reasons that the Mayor had to look to long term solutions to balance this budget in ways that has not been looked at before by this City. There are no quick fixes or magic tricks that will get this City through these times and still position the City to live within its means. In the past, that is exactly what the City did. The City would look for one-time solutions for a long term problem and hope that it could grow its way out to recovery. It cut its pension payments, ignored its infrastructure, "borrowed" from the enterprise funds, spent down reserves and did whatever it took in order to not cut programs or services. For a while this strategy worked, but eventually the house of cards fell and we are all now having to deal with it.

Cutting services and closing facilities is never an easy decision and should not be made lightly. The Mayor recognizes this and met with Department Directors to explore many alternative solutions to the City's problems. At last Wednesday's budget meeting, there was some discussion regarding the possibility of using one-time sources to preserve libraries and recreation centers. Now is not the time.

The City Council recently adopted a long term Reserve Policy which has received favorable comments from all three rating agencies. This Policy calls for the gradual but responsible building of City reserves in many of the City's core funds. Given the long terra uncertainty of this "recession" and the unknown timing for the fiscal recovery as well as factoring in the uncertainty of other variables such as the State's budget and future pension payments that could put additional pressure on the City's budget these Page 3 Honorable Members of the City Council November 18, 2008 000071 conditions suggest that it would be imprudent for the City to tap reserves now or turn to too many one- time-sources. This will not solve the City's budget deficit only put off dealing with it to next fiscal year.

Reserves should only be considered to fund expenditures when you are trying to solve a short-term fiscal problem or when you have a one-time problem that needs a one-time solution. These circumstances do not apply in this case. Even by solving the current year deficit through the closure of facilities and elimination of some services, the Five Year Financial Outlook reflects a $44 million deficit in fiscal year 2010 and that grows by an additional $24 million in fiscal year 2011. While the projected fiscal year 2011 deficit assumes some impact on the Annual Required Contribution (ARC) from the current market losses, it does not take into consideration a scenario where there is no market recovery through the end of this fiscal year and no other changes to the current pension plan and/or assumptions. As noted in the Five Year Financial Outlook report, this could increase the fiscal year 2013 ARC payment substantially.

In this vain, I also do not believe it is prudent to use the $2.4 million in one-time reserves in the Transient Occupancy Tax fund, which is projected to run a $4 million deficit in fiscal year 2010.

Finally, it is important to also note that the City's independent auditors have pointed out in each of the recent CAFRS that the City has a large unfunded deficit in the self-insurance fund, which includes the liabilities related to Public Liability, Workers Compensation and Long-Term Disability. Iri'fiscal year 2007, the liability amount was $178,700,000 which represent unfunded estimated claims and claims settlements. The auditors have requested that the City demonstrate a funding plan that will reduce this UahiUty and. the City's resporise has bccu that tlic Reserve Policy is in now in place and progress has been made over the past two years to begin to build up the reserves in these funds according to the targets set forth in the Reserve Policy. In particular, the additional amount collected in the Workers Compensation Fund in fiscal year 2008 should remain in reserves to demonstrate the City's commitment to achieving a 50% funding ratio by 2014.

Jay M. Goldstone . .

cc: Honorable Mayor Jerry Sanders Mary Lewis, Chief Financial Officer Andrea Tevlin, Independent Budget Analyst Nader Tirandazi, Finance Department Director Attachment III 000073

OFFICE OF MAYOR JERRY SANDERS MEMORANDUM

DATE: November 13, 2008

TO: Honorable Mayor Jerry Sanders Honorable City Council Jay Goldstone, Chief Operating Officer Deputy Chief Operating Officers Andrea Tevlin, Independent Budget Analyst

FROM: Job Nelson, Director of Intergovernmental Relations

RE: State Special Session- Governor's Budget

This past week the Governor called a special session of the California Legislature. The main topic for this special session is the struggling state economy and its impact on the state budget. In fact recent economic statistics show that the state's unemployment rate is higher that the national unemployment rate. This' weak employment has resulted in the loss of almost 80,000 jobs in the first three quarters of 2008, including losses in seven of the eleven major industry sectors for the state. The Department of Finance estimates that the state's unemployment rate could reach double figures during some months of 2009 and possibly extending into 2010.

As is also the case locally, the slumping economy has significantly impacted state revenues. The negative economy has a magnified effect on the state budget due to the structure of California's revenue system. Nearly 15% of state revenues come from capital gains taxes making California much more dependent upon Wall Street than other states across the country. Additionally, half of California's personal income tax revenue comes from only 1% of residents. These top 150,000 wage earners derive more of their income from volatile investment income and real estate than most taxpayers.

Department of Finance estimates that the state faces a revenue shortfall of $ 11.2 billion this fiscal year and $13 billion next year. This shortfall means that unless substantial changes are made in the FY 08/09 budget the state will face cash flow problems as early as February. The Legislative Analyst concurs with this assessment projecting a $28 billion short fall this year and next, followed by $20-$25 billion shprtfalls through FY 2013-14. The Governor has 000074 proposed spending reductions totaling $4.5 billion (49% of the proposed solution) and revenue increases totaling $4.7 billion (51% of the proposed solution). As proposed now, there are very few impacts to local governments in the Governor's budget adjustments. This is subject to change as result of negotiations with legislative leadership. The Legislative Analyst predicts that the Governor's proposed budget package would close the budget gap for this year and next.

Program Reductions:

public Safety Grant Programs

The proposal includes $51.7 million in cuts for public safety grants including cuts to grants for counties that operate juvenile camps. Office of Emergency Service (OES) directed public safety grants and grants to county sheriffs of smaller rural counties. The OES cuts will impact Vertical Prosecution Block Grants, Multi-jurisdictional Methamphetamine Enforcement Teams and Sexual Assault Felony Enforcement Teams.

Corrections and Rehabilitation

The Governor's office proposes restructuring parole procedures for non-violent or non-sexual crime offenders. These offenders would not receive parole supervision after their release. Additionally, the administration recommends statutory.changes that would increase the amount of earned credit inmates could accrue and adjustment of statutory threshold values for " property crimes to reflect inflation. These proposals would result in $85 million in savings in the current fiscal year.

State Transit Assistance Program

The administration recommends elimination of the portion of the State Transit Assistance program that is paid from the Public Transportation Account. This change will result in a savings of $229.9 million in this fiscal year. ..Locally this will result in a funding impact to . MTS of approximately $ 18 million. This, is on top of cuts in prior years and sales tax revenue falling which also impacts local transit programs.

Proposition 98 (K-14)

The Governor's office is proposing $2.5 billion in reductions in education spending. It should be noted that this is still over a $ 100 million higher than the minimum guarantee under Prop 98. These cuts are proposed to be spread out over all of K-14 education spending including child care programs, local education agencies and community colleges.

Higher Education

The administration recommends $132 million in reductions for higher education including $65.5 million to the UC system and $66.3 million to CSU system. Both cuts represent approximately 10% reductions. 000075 Supplemental Security Income (SSI)/State Supplementary Payment (SSP)

The Governor's Office proposes reducing SSI/SSP grants to the federal minimum effective March 1, 2Q09 resulting in $348.9 million in savings in this fiscal year.

CalWORKS

The administration proposes reducing CalWORKS grants by 10% effective March 1, 2009 and modifying the Safety Net program by making benefits consistent with other CalWORKS programs and requiring face-to-face reviews every six months. These changes will save $273.9 million in this fiscal year.

In-Home Supportive Services (IHSS)

The administration proposes changes to the IHSS program including modifying domestic and related services, limiting the state buyout program for the persons with the most severe needs and limiting state participation to the state minimum wage plus $.60 for health benefits for IHSS workers. These modifications will result in savings of $118.3 million in this fiscal year.

Medi-Cal

The proposal is to reduce California benefits to levels provided in most states and halting some of the optional benefits for adults. These changes will result in $41 million in savings in the current fiscal year.

California Food Assistance Program (CFAP)

The Governor's Office proposes eliminating the CFAP effective July 1, 2009 resulting in $30 million in savings in the next fiscal year. CFAP provides food benefits to low-income legal non-citizens.

Williamson Act

The administration recommends eliminating $34.7 million in state reimbursements to local taxing agencies that offset the loss of revenue with landowners who limit the use of their agricultural land under the Williamson Act.

Employee Compensation Changes

The proposal would require state employees to take a one day furlough each month starting December, 1, 2008 and ending June 30, 2010. Additionally, the plan would eliminate two state holidays, eliminate premium pay for all other remaining holidays and compute overtime based on actual time worked. The Governor also recommends establishing alternative work schedules of ten hour days/four days a week. These changes would result in $319.9 million in savings this fiscal year. 000076 Funding Realignments

Local Law Enforcement Grants

The administration proposes eliminating general fund support for local law enforcement grants such as COPS and Booking Fees. Instead they will be funded with the Vehicle License Fee (VLF) funds that are currently used to support the Department of Motor Vehicles. In turn DMV operations will be funded by increased revenue from a $12 increase in the annual vehicle registration fee. This fee had already been increased $11 as part of this year's budget. Overall funding for COPS will be reduced by $28.6 million in 2008-2009. This is an approximately 25% decrease in COPS funding. The City of San Diego received $2.5 million in COPS funding in Fiscal Year 2008. The overall funding for the Booking Fees Program will not be impacted. Juvenile probation activities will be treated in the same way and will be cut by $20.2 million in this fiscal year. The benefit to all of these programs is that they move from funding within the general fund to a permanent statutory funding stream. It is anticipated that these changes will save the general fund $198.8 million in this fiscal year.

Alcohol Excise Tax

The Governor proposes raising the alcohol excise tax by five cents a drink on January 1, 2009 (a drink is defined as 1.5 ounces of distilled spirits, 12 ounces of beer or 5 ounces of wine). Revenues created by this increase will be used to fund drug and alcohol abuse prevention and treatment programs that are currently being paid for out of the state's general fimd. This change will save the state $293 million in the current fiscal year.

Revenue Increases

Temporary Sales Tax Increase

The proposal contains a 1.5% increase in the sales tax for three years starting January 1, 2009. The increase is anticipated to generate $3.54 billion in FY 2008-09 and $7.32 billion in FY 2009-10. Under Proposition 42 it is estimated that an addition $322 million would be transferred to the Transportation Investment Fund. This number will increase to $676 million in FY 2009-10. A portion of these Prop 42 funds are used by local governments to fund local streets and roads projects.

Broaden Sales Tax to New Services

The administration also proposes applying the sales and use tax to furniture repair, vehicle repair, golf green fees and veterinarian services starting February 1, 2009. A month later the sales and use tax will also be extended to apply to amusement parks and sporting events. It should be noted that the 1% local governments receive in sales tax now would also apply to these new services. In fact, it is estimated .that local government agencies would see an additional $151 million statewide in this fiscal year. This expansion would also benefit public safety monies collected through sales tax. The Department of Finance estimates that ^ ^Mxpffnoing to these new areas will generate $357 million in new revenues this year and $1,156 billion the next.

Oil Severance Tax

The Governor proposes a 9.9% oil severance tax upon any oil production happening in California with certain minor exclusions starting January 1, 2009. This tax would bring California into line with taxes imposed by other states. It is estimated that this tax will generate $528 million in this fiscal year and $1,195 billion in the next.

Process and Outlook

While there are minor impacts to local government in the Governor's proposal, they are more than offset by the increased revenues that will be generated by the expansion of the sales tax base. It should be noted that the LAO believes the Department of Finance may be underestimating the increase revenue generated by approximately $1 billion over this year and next. Ultimately, this package still needs sign off by the state legislature. If the legislature is unwilling to take action during the lame duck session, the Governor will most likely call for another special session with the new legislature. Republican leadership is sending strong indicators that they are unlikely to sign off on any tax increase particularly in the lame duck session. The number of Republican seats has decreased in the new legislature making passage of revenue increases more likely in a second special session. That said, even with the dire economic situation the state is facing, agreement on a mix of cuts and revenue increases will be difficult to achieve. Attachment IV

000079 ATTORNEY TO CLIENT CORRESPONDENCE

FOR CON*!

Office of The City Attorney City of San Diego

MEMORANDUM MS 59

(619) 533-5800

DATE: April 30, 2008

TO: Honorable Mayor and City Council

FROM: City Attorney

SUBJECT: Unsupervised Skate Parks

INTRODUCTION The Council has requested an opinion from the City Attorney regarding the legal implications of changing operations at City skate parks from staff-supervised to unsupervised activities.

QUESTION PRESENTED

Will the City expose itself to greater liability if it changes its operations at City skate parks from staff-supervised to unsupervised activities?

SHORTANSWER Yes. Without staff supervision, it will be difficult for the City's skate parks to come within the limited statutory protection allowed hazardous recreational activities under California statute. Lack of supervision will make it more difficult for the City to guard against or warn of dangerous conditions, and to limit activities to those that pose only the normal risks associated with the sport. BACKGROUND The Park and Recreation Department is considering changing its method of operation for its four skate parks (and for the two additional parks expected to open in the future). Currently, the skate parks are operated by City staff and are not open unless supervisory staff is on-site. Staff collects fees and liability waivers from participants. Staff also monitors skate park activities and enforces City rules and policies. April 30, 2008 Honorable Mayor and City Council 000080

The Department is now considering operating some or all of the skate parks as unsupervised. The only staff present during operating hours (daytime) would be maintenance staff (accepting fees and issuing passes, processing waivers, and performing custodial duties). The parks would be closed and locked at night.

ANALYSIS

I. The City's Limited Liability to Participants in ''Hazardous Recreational Activities" The California Tort Claims Act, California Government Code sections 810-996.6 governs actions at law for civil liability against public entities and their officers and employees. A public entity is not generally liable for an injury except as otherwise provided by statute. Cal. Gov't Code § 815, Iverson v. Muroc Unified School District, 32 Cal. App. 4th 218, 227 (1995). A public entity may be held liable for a dangerous condition of its property that creates a "reasonably foreseeable risk," if the dangerous condition was created by the negligent act of an employee or the public entity had actual or constructive notice of the dangerous condition. Cal. Gov. Code § 835.

California Government Code section 831.7(a) provides specific immunity from liability for injuries suffered on public property when the injuries arise out of a "hazardous recreational activity," where the person "knew or reasonably should have known that the hazardous recreational activity created a substantial risk of injury."

The issue is whether the City is immune from liability under the terms of section 831.7 for . injuries arising from skateboarding at City skate parks, and whether the City's immunity is affected by the skate parks being supervised or unsupervised. We conclude that depending on the particular facts, the City may be immune from liability under this section, but that eliminating supervision will lessen that immunity.

The first question is whether skateboarding constitutes a "hazardousrecreationalactivity" for purposes of section 831.7. We conclude that it does.

Section 831.7(b) contains a two-pronged definition of "hazardous recreational activity". The first paragraph defines the term as ".. .a recreational activity which creates a substantial (as distinguished from a minor, trivial, or insignificant) risk of injury..." The second paragraph identifies certain activities that meet the definition (e.g., diving, animal riding, skiing). The two definitions are independent of one another. Although skateboarding is not specifically identified in the statute, caselaw has found, in effect, that skateboarding can be a hazardous recreational activity, depending on the circumstances. Bartell v. Palos Verdes Peninsula Sch. Dist., 83 Cal. App. 3d 492 (1978)(12-year-old boy killed when he fell off his skateboard while playing a game similar to "crack the whip"); Iverson, supra, 81 Ops, Cal. Atty. Gen. 331 (1998). The public entity would have to prove in each case that the particular activity created a substantial risk of injury to the participant.

-2- April 30, 2008 Honorable Mayor and City Council C00081

However, even if skateboarding at a skate park is considered a hazardous recreational activity, the public entity would still have to rebut any allegations that it failed to guard against or warn of a known dangerous condition that was not reasonably assumed by the participant as inherently part of the activity. Cal. Gov. Code § 831.7(c)(1). Caselaw has interpreted the phrase "reasonably assumed" as based on an objective standard Perez v. Los Angeles, 27 Cal. App. 4th 1380, 1386 (1994). The phrase takes into consideration the lower standard of care that is expected of children. Id. The question is whether areasonableperson, or reasonable child of a given age, would assume that the dangerous condition at issue was part of normal skate park activity.

Finally, the public entity's liability would not be limited in cases where it failed to properly construct or maintain the structure, equipment, etc., causing the injury, or in cases of gross negligence by the public entity. Cal. Gov't. Code § 831.7(c)(3) and (4).

Whether the City supervises skate parks or not would have no bearing on whether skateboarding is a hazardous recreational activity under section 831.7; however, lack of supervision will make it more difficult to guard against or warn of dangerous conditions not assumed to be part of the iiomial skai&p&ik acXiviiy — SUCJI as violtm gaincs (eg., "crack the whip"), extreme CODWSIS, or fighting.

II. The City's Conditional Immunity for Operating a Skateboard Park

In addition to the conditional immunity allowed for hazardousrecreationalactivities discussed above, the Legislature has provided a special immunity for skateboard parks in Health and Safety Code section 115800. Under this section, skateboarding at skateboard parks operated by the City on City property will automatically be protected as a "hazardous recreational activity" under the immunity of Government Code section 831.7, if all of the three requirements of section 115800 are met: (1) the person skateboarding is 12 or older; (2) the activity was stunt, trick, or luge skateboarding; and (3) either the skate park requires the wearing of a helmet, elbow pads, and knee pads, or, with respect to a park run by a municipality that is not supervised on a regular basis, there is an ordinance requiring the wearing of a helmet, elbow pads, and knee pads, and posted signs to that effect.1

Given that the nature of skateboarding activities at City skate parks falls within the "stunt, trick or luge" definition, given that existing SDMC sections require protective gear and signage,2 and,

1 Health and Safety Code section 115800 was amended in 2006 by SB 1179 (effective January 1, 2007). This bill extended the sunset provision by four years (from January 1, 2008 to January 1, 2012) and lowered the minimum age for skateboarders in public skateboard parks from 14 to 12 years of age. San Diego Municipal Code section 63.0107 requires skateboarders at City skate parks to wear helmets, elbow pads, and knee pads, and requires signs at City skate

-3- April 30, 2008 · Honorable Mayor and City Council 000082 finally, assuming proper signage, skateboarding at City skate parks would fall under the conditional immunity of this section for skateboarders over 12 who are injured.

Changing the operation of skate parks to unsupervised will not significantly lessen the immunity conferred by this statute (it specifically covers unsupervised skate parks), so long as someone is present to check skateboarders' identification to ensure they arc over twelve.

There is the argument that if the City provides supervision at its skate parks, it may expose itself to more liability if an injury is caused by neghgent supervision. In order to be liable under this theory, the City's actions or inactions would have to be grossly negligent. Cal, Gov. Code section 831.7(c)(5). While this is a valid argument, we believe the City is better protected from liability by operating skate parks that are as safe as possible. m. The Defense of Assumption of the Risk

Finally, changing the operation of City skate parks to unsupervised may also lessen the nroter-tion offered by the doctrine of assumption of the risk and the legal effect of the Agreement and Release of Liability participants are required to sign. Assumption of the risk is the voluntary and knowing exposure of oneself to obvious dangers incident to certain activities. See Morton v. Cal. Sports Car Club, 163 Cal. App. 2d 685,688 (1958). Skateboarders at City skate parks are sufficiently warned of the risks by common knowledge of the sport, and by the warnings contained in signage and in the Agreement and Release of Liability. Neinstein v. L.A. Dodgers, Inc., 185 Cal. App, 3d 176, 184 (1986). However, the defense only covers normal risks inherent in the activity, not particular dangers of which participants would have no knowledge. See Celli v. Sports Car Club ofAmerica, 29 Cal. App. 3d 511, 522 (1972). Participants would presumably be aware of normal skateboarding tricks; however, they may not know of the dangers posed by extreme contests or games such as "crack the whip." Supervision could ensure that skate park activities would be restricted to those posing only the nonnal risks inherent in the sport.

Also, where negligent maintenance or supervision permits an unusually dangerous condition to continue, liability may arise. See Hairston v. Studio Amusements, Ltd., 86 Cal. App. 2d 735, 739 (1948)(plaintiff fell while skating at defendant's roller skating rink, lay for several minutes without attention by guards, and was struck by a reckless patron skating backwards).

CONCLUSION

-4- April 30, 2008 Honorable Mayor and City Council C00083

115800 for skateboard parks in particular, the City remains liable for failure to guard or warn against known dangerous conditions or other hazardous recreational activities not reasonably assumed by the participant as inherently a part of skate park activities. Without staff supervision,, it will be difficult for the City's skate parks to come within the limited statutory protection of these California statutes. Further, by making it more difficult to limit the nature of the skate park activities to those that pose risks normally associated with the sport, eliminating supervision may restrict the applicability of the defense of assumption of the risk.

MICHAEL J. AGUIRRE. City Attorney

By Kimbcrly Arm Davies Deputy City Attorney

KADxa cc: Andrea Tevlin, Independent Budget Analyst Stacey LoMedico, Director, Park & Recreation Department Karen Heumann, Assistant City Attorney Kathryn Burton, Managing City Attorney

-5- ATTORNEY TO CLIENT CORRESPONDENCE 000085 FOR CONFIDENTIAL USE ONLY Office of RECEIVSD The City Attorney City of San Diego JUL 2 2007 MEMORANDUM MS 59 PaAAndRacrwtionOepanmflnt

(619) 533-5800

DATE: June 18, 2007

TO: Stacey LoMedico, Park and Recreation Director

FROM: City Attorney

SUBJECT: Unsupervised Skate Parks

LNTRODUCTTON

The Park and Recreation Department has requested an opinion from the City Attorney regarding the legal implications of changing operations at City skate parks from staff-supervised to unsupervised activities.

QUESTION PRESENTED

Will the City expose itself to greater liability if it changes its operations at City skate parks from staff-supervised to unsupervised activities?

SHORT ANSWER

Yes. Without staff supervision, it will be difficult for the City's skate parks to come within the limited statutory protection allowed hazardous recreational activities under California statute. Lack of supervision will make it more difficult for the City to guard against or warn of dangerous conditions, and to limit activities to those that pose only the normal risks associated with the sport. BACKGROUND

The Park and Recreation Department is considering changing its method of operation for its four skate parks (and for the two additional parks expected to open in the future). Currently, the skate parks are operated by City staff and are not open unless supervisory staff is on-site. Staff collects fees and liability waivers from participants. Staff also monitors skate park activities and enforces City rules and policies. June 18, 2007 Stacey LoMedico, Park and Recreation Director Park and Recreation Department '000086

ANALYSIS

I. The City's Limited Liability to Participants in "Hazardous Recreational Activities"

The California Tort Claims Act, California Government Code sections 810-996.6 governs actions at law for civil liability against public entities and their officers and employees. A public entity is not generally liable for an injury except as otherwise provided by statute. Cal. Gov't Code § 815, Iverson v. Muroc Unified School District (1995) 32 Cal.App. 4* 218, 227.-A public entity may be held liable for a dangerous,c ondition of its property that creates a "reasonably foreseeable risk," if the dangerous condition was created by the negligent.act of an employee or the public entity had actual or constructive notice of the dangerous condition. Cal. Gov. Code § 845.

California Government Code section S31.7 provides specific immunity from liability for injuries suffered on public property when the injuries arise out of a ''hazardous recreational activity," '' — where the person "knew or reasonably should have known that the hazardous recreational activity created a substantial risk of injury."

The issue is whether the City is immune from liability under the terms of section 831.7 for injuries arising from skateboarding at City skate parks, and whether the City's immunity is affected by the skate parks being supervised or unsupervised We conclude that depending on the particular facts, the City may be immune from liability under this section, but that eliminating supervision will lessen that immunity.

The first question is whether skateboarding constitutes a "hazardous recreational activity" for purposes of section 831.7. We conclude that it does.

Section 831.7(b) contains a two-pronged definition of "hazardous recreational activity". The first paragraph defines the term as "... a recreational activity which creates a substantial (as distinguished from a minor, trivial, or insignificant) risk of injury..." The second paragraph identifies certain activities that meet the definition (e.g., diving, animal riding, skiing). The two definitions are independent of one another. Although skateboarding is not specifically identified in the statute, caselaw has found, in effect, that skateboarding can be a hazardous recreational activity, depending on the circumstances. Bartell v. Palos Verdes Peninsula Sch. Dist. (1978) 83 Cal.App.3d 492 (12-year-old boy killed when he fell off his skateboard while playing a game similar to "crack the whip"); Iverson, supra, 81 Op. Atty. Gen. Cal 331. The public entity would have to prove in each case that the particular activity created a substantial risk of injury to the participant.

-2- June 18, 2007 Stacey LoMedico, Park and Recreation Director Park and Recreation Department C00087

However, even if skateboarding at a skate park is considered a hazardous recreational activity, the public entity would still have to rebut any allegations that it failed to guard against or warn of a known dangerous condition that was not reasonably assumed by the participant as inherently part of the activity. Cal. Gov. Code § 831.7(c)(1). Caselaw has interpreted the phrase "reasonably assumed" as based on an objective standard Perez v. Los Angeles (1994) 27 Cal.App.4th 1380, 1386. The phrase takes into consideration the lower standard of care that is expected of children. Id. The question is whether a reasonable person, or reasonable child of a given age, would assume that the dangerous condition at issue was part of nonnal skate park activity.

Whether the City supervises skate parks or not would have no bearing on whether skateboarding is a hazardous recreational activity under section 831.7; however, lack of supervision will make it more difficult to guard against or warn of dangerous conditions not assumed to be part of the nonnal skate park activity - such as violent games (e.g., "crack the whip"), extreme contests, or fighting.

II. The City's Conditional Immunity for Operating a Skateboard Park

In addition to the conditional immunity allowed for hazardous recreational activities discussed above, the Legislature has provided a special immunity for skateboard parks in Health and Safety Code section 115800. Under this section, skateboarding at skateboard parks operated by the City on City property will automatically be protected as a "hazardous recreational activity" under the immunity of Government Code section 831.7, if all of the three requirements of section 115800 are met: (1) the person skateboarding is 12 or older; (2) the activity was stunt, trick, or luge skateboarding; and (3) either the skate park requires the wearing of a helmet, elbow pads, and knee padSj or, with respect to a park run by a municipality that is not supervised on a regular basis, there is an ordinance requiring the wearing of a helmet, elbow pads, and knee pads, and posted signs to thai effect.

Given that the nature of skateboarding activities at City skate parks falls within the "stunt, trick or luge" definition, given that existing SDMC sections require protective gear and signage,' and, finally, assuming proper signage, skateboarding at City skate parks would fall under the conditional immunity of this section for skateboarders over 12 who are injured.

1 San Diego Municipal Code section 63.0107 requires skateboarders at City skate parks to wear helmets, elbow pads, and knee pads, and requires signs at City skate parks indicating that skateboarders failing to wear helmets, elbow pads and knee pads are subject to citation.

-3- June 18, 2007 Stacey LoMedico, Park and Recreation Director Park and Recreation Department 000088

Changing the operation of skate parks to unsupervised will not significantly lessen the immunity conferred by this statute (it specifically covers unsupervised skate parks), so, long as someone is present to check skateboarders' identification to ensure they are over twelve.

There is the argument that if the City provides supervision at its skate parks, it may expose itself to more liability if an injury is caused by negligent supervision. In order to be liable under this theory, the City's actions or inactions would have to be grossly negligent. Cal.Gov. Code section 831.7(c)(5). While this is a valid argument, we believe the City is better protected from liability by operating skate parks that are as safe as possible.

III. The Defense of Assumption of the Risk

Finally, changing the operation of City skate parks to unsupervised may also lessen the protection offered by the doctrine of assumption of the risk and the legal effect of the Agreement and Release of Liability participants are required to sign. Assumption of the risk is the voluntary and knowing exposure of oneself to obvious dangers incident to certain activities. See Morton v. CaL Spnm Car Club (1958). 163 Cal.App.2d 685, 688. Skateboarders at City skateparks are sufficiently warned of the risks by common knowledge of the sport, and by the warnings contained in signage and in the Agreement and Release of Liability. Neinstein v. LA, Dodgers (1986), 185 Cal.App.3d 176,184. However, the defense only covers nonnal risks.inherent in the activity, not particular dangers of which participants would have no knowledge. See Celliv. Sports Car Club ofAmerica (1972) 29 Cal.App.3d 511, 522. Participants would presumably be aware of normal skateboarding tricks; however, they may not know of the dangers posed by extreme contests or games such as "crack the whip." Supervision could ensure that skate park activities would be restricted to those posing only the normal risks inherent in the sport.

Also, where neghgent maintenance or supervision permits an unusually dangerous condition to continue, liability may arise. See Hairston v. Studio Amusements (1948) 86 CaI.App.2d 735, 739 (plaintiff fell while skating at defendant's roller skating rink, lay for several minutes without attention by guards, and was struck by a reckless patron skating backwards).

CONCLUSION

The City will expose itself to greater liability if it changes operations at its skate parks to unsupervised. Although conditional, limited immunity is conferred under California Government Code section 831.7 for hazardous recreational activities and Health and Safety. Code section 115800 for skateboard parks in particular, the City remains liable for failure to guard or warn against known dangerous conditions or other hazardous recreational activities not reasonably assumed by the participant as inherently a part of skate park activities. Without staff supervision, it will be difficult for the City's skate parks to come within the limited statutory protection of these California statutes. Further, by making it more difficult to limit the nature of the skate park

-A- June 18,2007 Stacey LoMedico, Park and Recreation Director Park and Recreation Department N C00089 activities to those that pose risks normally associated with the sport, eliminating supervision may restrict the applicability of the defense of assumption of the risk.

MICHAEL J. AGUIRRE, City Attorney

By Ol/fiU , Kimberly Ann Davies Deputy City Attorney KAD;ca cc: Patty Jenks, Supervising Management Analyst, Park & Recreation Department

-5- ·&oix?&& i//*M ^ 000091 CITY HEIGHTS Cammunlty Development Corporation November 19, 2008

Councilmember Toni Atkins, Chairperson and Members City of San Diego Committee on Budget and Finance 202 C Street, S an Diego, California 92101 BY EMAIL/PDF

RE: BUDGET CONSIDERATIONS AND RELATED ITEMS DDVUNISHMENT OF PARK AND RECREATION AND LIBRARY RESOURCES FOR CITY HEIGHTS

Dear Chairperson Atkins and Members of the City of San Diego Budget and Finance Committee:

I am writing on behalf of City Heights Community Development Corporation (CHCDC) Board of Directore to express concern with proposed cuts to the operation of Park and Recreational Facilities and Libraries. We understand the serious budgetary resource issues that you and the other members of the City Council and Mayor are faced to address. It is important as you consider options to address those cuts that it is recognized the disproportionate impact that closures or reduction of hours of recreational centers and libraries will have in communities like City Heights.

The median age of residents of City Heights ts lower than most communities as is the median household income. The options for these youth and their families for after school activities is severely limited by the income level and the proportionate inadequacies of existing recreational and learning opportunities.

We are fortunate to have the wonderful Weingart Public Library and the adjacent City Heights Park and Recreation Center. While those facilities are not proposed for cuts at this time, it is expected that there will be proposals for cuts to these types of facilities in the future. . Please consider the need and the demand and the special economic circumstances within City Heights. This is a community of over 90,000 residents, most with lower household incomes and many of whom are recent arrivals from around the world. . Many more thousands of youth and their families from adjacent communities and neighborhoods are served by these Urban Village facilities and other recreation centers located in City Heights.

The cost of not providing these recreational and learning opportunities will become quickly evident in the potential for an increase in other non-productive or counter-productive activities and the diminishment of learning opportunities to better their economic circumstances. The multiplier effect in this culturally and linguistically diverse community of closures and reduction in services is far higher than other communities.

We encourage the Mayor and City Council to consider the potential to engage other partners in the public interest including the School District, other public and private entities and community based non profit organizations in identifying options to closure and reduction of facilities and in identifying options to retain these needed facilities..

Thank you for your consideration. Sincerely, ./?—

HC Jay Powell, CHCDC Executive Director

Cc Mayor Jerry Sanders San Diego City Councilmembers

4283 El CajonBlvd, Suite. 220 City Heighii. CA92105 · 619-584-1535 -FAX; 619/584-7992»[email protected] C00093

THE CITY OF SAN DIEGO

MEMORANDU M

DATE: November 18, 2008

TO: Andrea Tevlin, Independent Budget Analyst

FROM: Deborah Barrow, Library Director

SUBJECT; Branch Library Operational Considerations in Reducing Hours

Per your request, this is written to describe operational considerations in further reducing branch library hours, which could be an alternative to closing some branch libraries.

In FY 2006, most branch libraries (31 of 35) reduced hours from 48 to 41 hours per week (Monday - Saturday), with 12 remaining open Sundays from 1:00 to 5:00 pm. The Mission Valley Branch Library had its hours reduced from 72 to 41 hours per week. These hours have continued, with three (3) branches open 48 hours, or 8 hours per day, Monday through Saturday. To maximize library services for the public, 41 open hours were spread across six (6) rather than five (5) days, with shorter open hours on Friday and Saturday.

The following, operational considerations constrain further reductions in branch library hours:

1. Full-time Staff Schedules. Full-time employees work Monday through Thursday, and alternating Friday and Saturday. This allows 41 open hours over six days of library service per week. Only half of the regular, Full-time staff works on Fridays and Saturdays, with part-time staff employed on these days only to the point to ensure security and adequate public services. Half of all branch employees are part-time (Half-time and Hourly), to more efficiently staff branches on Friday, Saturday and Sundays and to cover absences of essential positions. Through this staffing structure, the Library is also able to avoid overtime costs.

2. Reduce Hours by 10% or to 32 Hours per Week. Most branch libraries (32 of 35) operate 41 hours over six days (Monday through Saturday). Reducing hours by one day per week, or decreasing hours each day, is untenable and inefficient for several reasons:

A. Public Confusion if Open Staggered Days. For Full-time staff to work a 40-hour week in libraries that are open only 32 hours per week, libraries would need to be open different days of the week. Then, Full-time staff could complete their 40 hours by working at a different location. Similarly, libraries with less than 8 open hours per day could not be worked by Full-time staff unless these hours coincide with a 40-hour work week, as is accomplished with the current open hours. Public confusion over differing open days, and differing hours per day, would be substantial. Page 2 Branch Library Operational Considerations in Reducing Hours November 17, 2008

B. Staff Retention and Costs. The retention of Full-time employees that are offered undesirable schedules, particularly working both weekend days, is expected to be a problem. Retention of part-time staff (Half-time and Hourly) has been a substantial issue for the Library. Staff turnover results in poorer service to the public through loss of experienced staff and results in more costs for hiring and training.

C. Option of Three-Quarter-Time Staff. Full-time staff could be offered Three-Quarter-time positions (32-hours per week) to address a one-day reduction in service. Reduced benefits would need to be part of union contract negotiations. It is unknown how many staff would be willing to take this option.

D. Five Percent (5%) Shift Differential. The City's Personnel Regulation H-6 requires that employees be paid an extra 5% of their salary if their schedule does not include two consecutive days of rest. The Library reached agreement with MEA for Full-time employees to have 2 consecutive days off every other week. These employees work Monday through Thursday and Saturday on the alternating week. This means library hours can not be reduced by closing the least busy days of the week, such as Tuesday, Thursday or Friday, without addressing increased employee costs, or going to all part- time staff. The savings from cutting a day of service can therefore be wiped out by the 5% increase in personnel costs, even if employees can be retained to work the schedules.

E. Use All Part-time Staff. Half-time and Hourly employees could exclusively be used to operate libraries open only 32 hours per week. As addressed above, this would result in greater turnover and increased costs associated with hiring, training and management of part-time staff and their schedules.

3. Reduce Hours by Pairing of Branches with Three-Day Open Hours. Branches could be paired, with one library open three days per week and the other open the opposite three days per week. Then Full-time staff could move from one branch to the other to complete their 40- hours. This alternative is not recommended for the following reasons:

· Public confusion over open hours; · Public dissatisfaction over, loss of hours at their branch library in each "pair." In order to result in meaningful savings, at least half of the branches would need to be paired in this way; · No decrease in most non-personnel costs for building and grounds maintenance; · No decrease in costs to purchase, process and maintain the collections; · Risks in lapses of public service and staffing inefficiencies due to the need to clear book drops every day, discharge returned materials to avoid erroneous fines, and retrieve books requested for transfer to other branches by online Holds; · Increased risk of vandalism at libraries opens only three days per week.

With over 7 million books and videos being checked out annually at the San Diego Public Library, the operational issues and inefficiencies would be substantial. Public dissatisfaction with open hours across much of the City would be an even greater issue. Page 3 Branch Library Operational Considerations in Reducing Hours November 17, 2008 000095 4. Tuesday through Saturday Open Hours. Some staffing reductions could be achieved by closing all branch libraries on Mondays with only one (1) hour per week reduction in open hours. The current 41 hours of service, Monday through Saturday, could be provided in 40 hours, five (5) days per week, Tuesday through Saturday. Benefits include:

A. This shift in open hours can reduce some staff costs while providing more consistent open hours per day. Each day open would offer 8 hours of service with one day offering a later shift (12:00 noon to 8:00 pm). The system wide consistency of hours between facilities and from one day of the week to the next would reduce the public's confusion over open hours.

B. Fridays and Saturdays could be open 8 hours instead only 5 hours for the public.

C. Cost savings would result by needing about 9.50 FTE fewer part-time staff to work on Fridays and Saturdays, when half of the regular, Full-time staff are working;

D. The City regulation (Personnel Regulation, Index Code H-6, Section II.A. - see Section 2. D. above) would be addressed to avoid the extra 5% salary cost by having two consecutive days of rest.

5. Reduce Sunday Hours. Sunday hours (1 ;00 - 5:00 pm) are provided at 12 branch libraries, with three (3) funded from private donations. Closing nine (9) branch libraries on Sundays would save approximately $35,000 to $70,000 annually per branch library, including Personnel and Non-personnel expenses, and depending on the size and activity level of the facility. The loss of Sunday hours could also be mitigated by going to a Tuesday through Saturday, 5-day schedule with a full 8-hours open on Fridays and Saturdays.

The options for reduced hours at branch libraries, as discussed above, do not approach the 10% reduction in costs being requested. Reducing branch library hours would also have a larger negative service impact on the public compared to the alternative of closing several branch libraries that are smaller in size, with fewer resources and with lower public use. The City of San Diego is unique in the number of library facilities offered per capita. Library patrons here have the advantage of being able to use alternative public libraries located in relatively close proximity.

Deborah Barrow Library Director

cc: Jay Goldstone, Chief Operating Officer Elmer Heap, Deputy Chief Operating Officer Meryl Balko, Deputy Director, Branch Libraries Division 0140 6 y /i' //?/<* Sr#7 000097

THE CITY OF SAN DIEGO

MEMORANDU M

DATE: November 18, 2008

TO: Andrea Tevlin, Independent Budget Analyst

FROM: Stacey LoMedico, Park and Recreation Department Director

SUBJECT; FY 2009 Proposed Mid-Year Reductions . Park and Recreation Responses to November 12 Council Questions

Recreation Center Closures In order to address the deficit in the City's General Fund, departments were requested to identify } i) percent reductions to their Fiscal Year 2009 budget appropriations. The Park and Recreation Department identified various programs for reduction or elimination, ail of which were difficult decisions to make. Since the Department has had significant reductions in the past (over $16 million in the last 5 fiscal years), it was not possible to provide enough savings by only "shaving off pieces of services or programs. Many of the proposed mid-year reductions impact core services. Of all the reductions, the closure of nine recreation centers and one gymnasium will have the greatest impact to the citizens of San Diego and visitors to our parks.

In the City's park and recreation system, recreation centers come in various sizes and amenities. As part of the process to identify reductions, the Department reviewed recreation center operations to identify a methodology that would have the least impact to park users system wide. Key factors considered included the size and layout of the facility, the location, and the proximity to other similar facilities, estimated site attendance, and staffing levels. After analysis, the decision was made to propose the reduction of the smallest centers within the system, which are budgeted at Recreation Center I sites (listed below). (Other centers are staffed by Recreation Center Director II's or Ill's.)

The Department reviewed 3 other scenarios for recreation center reductions. Each involved in reducing overall hours at all centers system-wide. Most recreation centers operate an average of 40 hours per week. There are.some sites that currently operate at 48 hours; however, these will be reduced to 40 hours with the proposed reduction of the Assistant Recreation Center Directors as part of the Department's mid-year submittal. Based upon input from staff the further reduction of center hours system-wide will have a greater impact on the public then the closure of some centers.

It should be noted that while some communities may reduce this impact by donating funds to increase the center's hours of operation, these additional hours will likely be inconsistent and not staffed by center directors which will impact the range of services offered. Page 2 Park and Recreation Responses to November 12 Council Questions November 18, 2008 000098 Scenario 1: Reduction of operating hours from 40 to 35 per week. This reduces hourly staffing levels. Estimated net annual reduction is $218,493 (6.25 FTE). Mid-year savings is estimated at $109,247.

Scenario 2: Reduction of operating hours from 40 to 30 per week. This reduces benefited and hourly staffing levels. Full-time recreation center directors would be reduced to three-quarter time status (requires meet and confer before implementation). Estimated net annual reduction is $1,205,019 (19.00 FTE). Mid-year savings is estimated at $602,509.

Scenario 3: Reduction of operating hours for small and medium centers from 40 to 30 per week and large centers from 40 to 35 hours. This reduces benefited and hourly staffing levels. Full-time Recreation Center Director I's and II's would be reduced to three-quarter time status (requires meet and confer before implementation). Estimated net annual reduction is $648,491 (12.00 FTE). Mid-year savings is estimated at $324,246.

Reduction of hours will also not reduce the overall supervision required by the area supervisors, as iiiG centers will still be open, just ior a reduced nuiiibor of hours per week.

The information below provides additional details on the proposed site closures. Mid-year net restoration costs total $723,181 and includes two area supervisors (Area Manager) which are prorated below for each site.

Adams Recreation Center Council District 3 3491 Adams Ave., 92116 (619)235-1149 Sq. Ft. 2,360

Estimated annual attendance at this site is 24,000. Amenities include two multi-purpose rooms, children's play areas, kitchen, one lighted softbali field, two outdoor basketball courts (no lights), and an outdoor stage. Permits for outdoor use can be obtained from North Park (est. 1.81 miles). Net mid-year restoration cost: $73,495.

Azalea Recreation Center Council District 3 2596 Violet St, 92105 (619)235-1162 Sq. Ft 1,790

Estimated annual attendance at this site is 75,000. Amenities include one multi-purpose room, outdoor lighted basketball courts, and children's play area. Permits for outdoor use can be obtained from City Heights (3.00 miles). Net mid-year restoration cost: $87,108. Page 3 Park and Recreation Responses to November 12 Council Questions ;r 18,2008

Black Mountain Gymnasium Council District 1 9353 Oviedo St, 92129 (858)538-8128 Sq. Ft. 13,677

Estimated annual attendance at this site is 10,600. Amenities include one multi-purpose room and one indoor basketball court. The City has a 50-year agreement (signed in 1990) with the Poway Unified School District for this site. Preliminary review of the agreement reflects that the City must continue to pay for utilities. The site will be managed by the school district. Net mid-year restoration cost: $51,088.

Cabrillo Recreation Center Council District 2 3051 Canon St, 92106 (619)531-1534 Sq. Ft. 1,984

Estimated annual attendance at this site is 49,700. Amenities include a large multi-purpose room, kitchen, basketball courts, tennis courts (operated by Tennis Club), one multi-purpose field, lighted Softball field, and a children's play area. Permits for outdoor use can be obtained from Ocean Beach (2.35 miles). Net mid-year restoration cost: $48,670.

Cadman Recreation Center Council District 6 4280 Avati Dr., 92117 (858)581-9929 Sq. Ft. 3,918

Estimated annual attendance at this site is 15,600. Amenities include two multi-purpose rooms, two softbali fields, little Padres baseball field, children's play area, dog off-leash park, tennis court, one outdoor basketball court, and one horse shoe pit. Permits for outdoor use can be obtained from North Clairemont (2.01 miles). Net mid-year restoration cost: $66,262.

Lopez Ridge Field House Council District 5 7245 Calle Cristobal (858)538-8171 Sq. Ft. 2,588

Estimated annual attendance at this site is 9,600. Amenities include two multi-purpose rooms, kitchen, outdoor basketball courts, baseball field, and children's play area. Permits for outdoor use can be obtained from Mira Mesa (3.20 miles). Net mid-year restoration cost: $68,064. Page 4 Park and Recreation Responses to November 12 Council Questions November 18, 2008 000100 Penn Field House Council District 4 2550 Dusk Dr, 92139 (619)527-3458 Sq. Ft. 2,880

Estimated annual attendance at this site is 90,000. Amenities include one multi-purpose room, large multi-purpose field, lighted softbali field, children's play areas, weight room, and kitchen. Permits for outdoor use can be obtained from Paradise Hills (0.61 miles). The City had an agreement with the San Diego Unified School District for this site. Preliminary review of the agreement reflects that the City may be required to continue to pay for utilities and may be requested to remove improvements at the site. Net mid-year restoration cost: $76,587.

Presidio Recreation Center Council District 2 2811 Jackson St, 92110 (619)692-4918 Sq. Ft. 5,302

Estimated annual attendance at this site is 29,000. Amenities include indoor and outdoor basketball courts and a lighted softbali field. Permits for outdoor use can be obtained from Robb Field (4.67 miles). Net mid-year restoration cost: $66,911.

Stockton Recreation Center Council District 8 330 32nd Street, 92102 (619)235-1163 Sq. Ft. 2,354

Estimated annual attendance at this site is 4,000. Amenities include two multi-purpose rooms, kitchen, lighted basketball courts, one softbali field, one multi-purpose field, and children's play areas. Permits for outdoor use can be obtained from Memorial (1.09 miles). Net mid-year restoration cost: $63,425.

Tecolote Recreation Center Council District 6 4675 Tecolote Road, 92110 (858)581-9930 Sq. Ft. 1,694

Estimated annual attendance at this site is 13,000. Amenities include one multi-purpose room, five baseball fields, one flag football field, outdoor basketball courts and picnic areas. Permits for outdoor use can be obtained from Robb Field (3.54 miles). Net mid-year restoration cost: $75,263. Page 5 Park and Recreation Responses to November 12 Council Questions November 18, 2008 000101 Mid-City Gymnasium Council District 3 4302 Landis Street, 92105 (619)516-3082. Sq. Ft. 8,600 This site is not closing; however, it will be managed from the City Heights Recreation Center. Estimated annual attendance at this site is 70,000. Amenities include a gymnasium. Permits can be obtained from City Heights (across street). Net mid-year restoration cost: $46,308.

Use of Golf Enterprise Fund Balance Attachment 1 is a F.Y 2006 Proposed Budget - Budget Referral regarding the use of golf fund balance for general fimd purposes. In Fiscal Year 2009, Golf Operations is budgeted for the following transfers to the General Fund:

Land Use Payment (per established formula): $2,130,934 General Government Services Billing $ 477,125

Golf Operations is also billed for specific support from various departments such as auditors and engineering and capital projects. Fund balance is needed for future capital projects to maintain the courses and protect these assets.

Operation of Skate Parks by Non-City Staff (Will defer to the Business Office to respond.)

New Facilities Not Yet Under Construction Engineering and Capital Projects (E&CP) and City Planning and Community Investment (CP&CI) departments could provide a list of projects not yet under construction and the ability to terminate agreements. The Department is supportive of new facilities and deferred maintenance projects; however, operating costs for new sites cannot be absorbed without reductions in other services. Attachment 2 is a list of projects that were programmed for Fiscal Year 2009 for the Mission Bay Improvement Fund (10502) and the Regional Park Improvement Fund (10518). Project status or changes to allocations should be confirmed with E&CP and CP&CI. Of the projects listed, Park and Recreation has noted those projects that are NOT recommended for suspension at this time.

Competitive Level Swim Teams The estimated annual direct cost for the City to operate a non-recreational-based competitive youth swim team at 2 of the 13 pools (City Heights and Memorial) is $39,911. This does not include non-personnel expenses. Revenue is estimated at $4,500.

Currently there are 22 registered swimmers participating in this program. It is currently the only competitive youth sports program offered by city staff. Other youth sports club programs (competitive and recreational) use facilities within the park system and are not directly supervised and managed by Park and Recreation Department staff and city taxpayer monies. Page 6 codPafrka arn d1 8R e' c2re0a0tio8n Responses to November 12 Council Questions The existing program could be offered by a private operator who would rent the pool at the City of San Diego's current rental fee of $41.75 per hour for non-exclusive use. Estimating a total of 840 rental hours per year for two teams and providing for an outside coach (estimated at $15 per hour) participants would pay an average of$180 per month for private operation. This is the same method hundreds of other youth competitive teams/providers currently use city facilities.

Another option is for the current participants to join with another recognized swim club (approximately thirty-one in San Diego County). Many of these clubs offer scholarships and some are within 15 minutes of the current locations.

The competitive level swim team operated at Memorial Pool is eligible for restoration through the use of EDCO fund monies (#41205). The available EDCO funds are estimated at $435,000 by the City Comptroller's office. All park bond funds eligible for programming have been allocated and are not available.

Unsupervised Skate Parks Attachment 3 has the two previous City Attorney opinions regarding the liability of unsupervised skate parks.

Beach Grooming Mechanized Beach Maintenance The city coastline includes 100 acres of naturally maintained beaches and 150 acres of fully maintained beaches. The Park and Recreation Department's mechanized beach maintenance operates with a staff of 16 which provide the following services: removal of trash from beach barrels, illegal dumps, fire debris, abandoned boats, dead marine animals, fire ring material (proposed for reduction), kelp and sea grasses; provide for safe and attractive beaches by transport and deposit of sand, erosion control by contouring of sand to proper shoreline slope, filling of dangerous beach depressions and holes, raking and sifting sand to remove dangerous objects; creation of shoreline sand berms to protect public property and assets from wave damage, recovery of bay sand transported into shoreline coves and inlets by tidal action; creation of sand dunes for endangered wildlife; support of lifeguard service operations by placement and removal of portable watch towers, building of sand beach emergency vehicle access roads, and construction of sand ramp-ways under seasonal towers to provide for faster emergency rescue response time.

Elimination of the beach grooming function removes the year-round functions of raking and screening of sand as well as kelp removal. The sand raking removes litter, debris such as glass and nails, and other hazardous objects found in the sand. The beach grooming also removes the kelp and eel grass from the mean high tide. Reduction in these services eliminates 5.00 Equipment Operator II's ($394,688), 4.00 Heavy Truck Driver I's ($307,162) and non-personnel costs ($355,607) annually and will impact operations:

Kelp will not be removed from shoreline beaches from La Jolla to Ocean Beach. This kelp is used for winter and other storm related safety berm construction. · Raking the sand helps to remove objects that become buried in the sand and can cause injuries to people who run or walk on the beach. These items include glass, crushed aluminum cans with sharp edges, nails, and syringes. Page 7 Park and Recreation Responses to November 12 Council Questions November 18, 2008

Raking the sand helps to smooth out holes and/or depressions that people dig. People who lay in these holes/depressions are difficult for lifeguards, police or other City workers to see when they drive vehicles on the beach. Lifeguards have indicated this service is warranted to support their operations. Lifeguards avoid driving over piles of kelp whenever possible. Children may burry themselves with the kelp, or people can hide items under kelp when they go out into the water. Increased kelp hampers the safe operation of emergency vehicles.

In addition, as kelp decomposes, it can become foul smelling and attract flies. This becomes a source of complaints from beach patrons. With the reduction of this unit, the Department's ability to protect and recover from storm damage related emergencies will also be diminished. The crew not only supports beach and shoreline park related storm clean up, but also throughout the park system. cc: Jay Goldstone, Chief Operating Officer Patty Jencks, Supervising Management Analyst Attachment 1 000105 File No: 22

CITY COUNCIL REFERRAL REGARDING THE FISCAL YEAR 2006 PROPOSED BUDGET

TO: Honorable Mayor and City Council

FROM: · P. Lamont Ewell, City Manager

RESPONDING DEPARTMENT: Park and Recreation

ISSUE: During the City Council meeting of May 23, 2005 regarding the Fiscal Year 2006 Proposed Budget, Councilmember Young requested information on the reason for the projected decline in Golf Course rent to the General Fund below the Fiscal Years 2004 and 2005 levels. In addition, Councilmember Young would like to know what the Council needs to do to adjust the formula that is currently used to charge rent to the golf courses and what the maximum amount of rent is that can be legally charged to the golf courses.

RESPONSE: The Golf Enterprise Fund was created as of July 1, 1991. The reasons for its formation were to limit the General Fund's future obligations to support the city golf courses and to allow the courses flexibility to make capital improvements to the extent that revenues and expenses allow. In 1995, the City began charging the Golf Course Enterprise Fund a set rent based on two components. The first component was a fixed annual rate of $1,500 per acre. This amount was comparable to rent being paid by the Mission Trails Golf Course. The second component was 9.9% of the gross revenues. It was expected that the rent would be reviewed every five years.

"Enterprise" is defined as "a revenue-producing improvement, building, system, plant, work, facilities, or undertaking used for or useful for any of the following purposes: The providing of public golf courses, and facilities and improvements in connection therewith." Ca. Gov. Code § 54309(i). The Council can change the rent paid by the Enterprise Fund through the Appropriations Ordinance or by resolution. However, the Golf Enterprise Fund consists of rents paid by lessees and fees for services paid by golfers. To the extent any maintenance of and improvements to the golf courses suffer due to decreased availability of funds, the City's revenues will also suffer. Additionally, fees for services cannot be higher than the cost to provide the service, or the fee becomes a tax. At some point, the . Golf Enterprise Fund would no longer be a revenue-producing undertaking for the purpose of providing the necessary facilities and improvements.

The annual rent calculation is based on the previous year's budgeted revenue. The proposed FY 2006 rent calculation of $1,557,178 is a reduction from the previous year's rent due to the proposed six month closure of the Torrey Pines Golf Complex's North Course in FY 2005. This proposed closure reduced the FY 2005 revenue projections for North Course green fees by approximately $1.7 (j 0 01 0 U million from the FY 2004 projection. This decline in revenue subsequently reduced the proposed rent to be paid by the Golf Enterprise Fund in FY 2006.

However, since Torrey Pines Golf Complex's North Course did not close as planned in FY 2005, staff recommends utilizing the FY 2004's actual revenue as the basis for the FY 2006 rent calculation. Utilizing this methodology would increase the annual rent projection by $64,614 to $1,621,792. Attachment 2

000107 Fiscal Year 2009 Projects Funded by Mission Bay Lease Revenue

The following list reflects projects that were allocated in Fiscal Year 2009. Expenditures or project status is not listed. Prior year funding allocations

22-976.0 Sunset Point Parking Lot - Security Lighting $150,000 22-977.0 Vacation Isle North Cove Parking Lot - Security Lighting $150,000

22-978.0 Vacation Isle North Cove Road Improvements $150,000 22-979.0 Vacation Isle Northeast Parking Lot Security Lighting $150,000 22-980.0 West Bonita Cove Children's Play Area Upgrades $200,000 22-966.0 West Ski Island - Shoreline Stabilization $500,000 22-972.0 North Crown Point Gazebo Replacement . $265,000 Total !y^'cc'on Ba^' Improvement Fund $2 466 S02

Regional Park Improvement Fund Allocations for FY 2009 21-876.0 Balboa Park - Florida Canyon Evaluation and Repair of $1,000,000 Broken Storm Drain ** 21-877.0 Balboa Park - Marston Point Evaluation and Repair of $50,000 Collapsed Storm Drain 27-875.0 Balboa Park - Morley Field Evaluation and Repair of $50,000 Collapsed Storm Drain 21-870.0 Balboa Park - Myrtle Way Pergola $350,000 29-975.0 Crest Canyon Resource Management Plan * $75,000 29-974.0 Gonzalez Canyon Resource Management Plan * $200,000 29-966.0 Mission Trails Regional Park Cowles Mountain Trail $400,000 Rehabilitation * 29-967.0 Mission Trails Regional Park Trail Realignments $300,000 29-909.0 Regional Park Improvements $41,803 Total Regional Park Improvement Fund $2,466,803

* The Park and Recreation Department requests that these projects remain funded. ** Engineering and Capital Projects Department request that $275,000 remain for the design of the project. 000109 ATTORNEY TO CLIENT CORRESPONDENCE

FOR CONFE

Office of The City Attorney City of San Diego

MEMORANDUM MS 59

(619) 533-5800

DATE: April 30, 2008

TO: Honorable Mayor and City Council

FROM: City Attorney

SUBJECT: Unsupervised Skate Parks

INTRODUCTION

The Council has requested an opinion from the City Attorney regarding the legal implications of changing operations at City skate parks from staff-supervised to unsupervised activities.

QUESTION PRESENTED

Will the City expose itself to greater liability if it changes its operations at City skate parks from staff-supervised to unsupervised activities?

SHORT ANSWER

The Park and Recreation Department is considering changing its method of operation for its four skate parks (and for the two additional parks expected to open in the future). Currently, the skate parks are operated by City staff and are not open unless supervisory staff is on-site. Staff collects fees and liability waivers from participants. Staff also monitors skate park activities and enforces City rules and policies. 000110 April 30, 2008 Honorable Mayor and City Council

ANALYSIS

I. The City's Limited Liability to Participants in hazardous Recreational Activities"

The California Tort Claims Act, California Government Code sections 810-996.6 governs actions at law for civil liability against public entities and their officers and employees. A public entity is not generally liable for an injury except as otherwise provided by statute. Cal. Gov't Code § 815, Iverson v. Muroc Unified School District, 32 Cal. App. 4th 218, 227 (1995). A public entity may be held liable for a dangerous condition of its property that creates a "reasonably foreseeable risk," if the dangerous condition was created by the negligent act of an employee or the public entity had actual or constructive notice of the dangerous condition. Cal. Gov. Code § 835.

The issue is whether the City is immune from liability under the terms of section 831.7 for injuries arising from skateboarding at City skate parks, and whether the City's immunity is affected by the skate parks being supervised or unsupervised. We conclude that depending on the, particular facts, the City may be immune from liability under this section, but that eliminating supervision will lessen that immunity.

The first question is whether skateboarding constitutes a "hazardous recreational activity" for purposes of section 831.7. We conclude that it does.

Section 831.7(b) contains a two-pronged definition of "hazardous recreational activity". The first paragraph defines the term as ".. .a recreational activity which creates a substantial (as distinguished from a minor, trivial, or insignificant) risk of injury..." The second paragraph identifies certain activities that meet the definition (e.g., diving, animal riding, skiing). The two definitions are independent of one another. Although skateboarding is not specifically identified in the statute, caselaw has found, in effect, that skateboarding can be a hazardous recreational activity, depending on the circumstances. Bartell v. Palos Verdes Peninsula Sch. Dist., 83 Cal. App. 3d 492 (1978)(12-year-old boy killed when he fell off his skateboard while playing a game similar to "crack the whip"); Iverson, supra, 81 Ops. Cal. Atty. Gen. 331 (1998). The public entity would have to prove in each case that the particular activity created a substantial risk of injury to the participant.

-2- 000111 April 30, 2008 Honorable Mayor and City Council v^

However, even if skateboarding at a skate park is considered a hazardous recreational activity, the public entity would still have to rebut any allegations that it failed to guard against or warn of a known dangerous condition that was not reasonably assumed by the participant as inherently part of the activity. Cal. Gov. Code § 831.7(c)(1). Caselaw has interpreted the phrase "reasonably assumed" as based on an objective standard. Perez v. Los Angeles, 21 Cal. App. 4th 1380, 1386 (1994). The phrase takes into consideration the lower standard of care that is expected of children. Id. The question is whether a reasonable person, or reasonable child of a given age, would assume that the dangerous condition at issue was part of normal skate park activity.

Whether the City supervises skate parks or not would have no bearing on whether skateboarding is a hazardous recreational activity under section 831.7; however, lack of supervision will make it more difficult to guard against or warn of dangerous conditions not assumed to be part of the normal skate park activity ~ such as violent games (e.g., "crack the whip"), extreme contests, or fighting.

II. The City's Conditional Immunity for Operating a Skateboard Park

In addition to the conditional immunity allowed for hazardous recreational activities discussed above,- the Legislature has provided a special immunity for skateboard parks in Health and Safety Code section 115800. Under this section, skateboarding at skateboard parks operated by the City on City property will automatically be protected as a "hazardous recreational activity" under the immunity of Government Code section 831.7, if all of the three requirements of section 115800 are met: (1) the person skateboarding is 12 or older; (2) the activity was stunt, trick, or luge skateboarding; and (3) either the skate park requires the wearing of a helmet, elbow pads, and knee pads, or, with respect to a park run by a municipality that is not supervised on a regular basis, there is an ordinance requiring the wearing of a helmet, elbow pads, and knee pads, and posted signs to that effect.1

Given that the nature of skateboarding activities at City skate parks falls within the "stunt, trick or luge" definition, given that existing SDMC sections require protective gear and signage, and,

1 Health and Safely Code section 115800 was amended in 2006 by SB 1179 (effective January 1, 2007). This bill extended the sunset provision by four years (from January 1, 2008 to January 1, 2012) and lowered the minimum age for skateboarders in public skateboard parks from 14 to 12 years of age. San Diego Municipal Code section 63.0107 requires skateboarders at City skate parks to wear helmets, elbow pads, and knee pads, and requires signs at City skate

-3- 000112

April 30, 2008 Honorable Mayor and City Council

finally, assuming proper signage, skateboarding at City skate parks would fall under the conditional immunity of this section for skateboarders over 12 who are injured.

There is the argument that if the City provides supervision at its skate parks, it may expose itself to more liability if an injury is caused by negligent supervision. In order to be liable under this theory, the City's actions or inactions would have to be grossly negligent. Cal. Gov. Code section 831.7(c)(5). While this is a valid argument, we believe the City is better protected from liability by operating skate parks that are as safe as possible.

HI. The Defense of Assumption of the Risk

Finally, changing the operation of City skate parks to unsupervised may also lessen the protection offered by the doctrine of assumption of the risk and the legal effect of the Agreement and Release of Liability participants are required to sign. Assumption of the risk is the voluntary and knowing exposure of oneself to obvious dangers incident to certain activities. See Morton v. Cal. Sports Car Club, 163 Cal. App. 2d 685,688 (1958). Skateboarders at City skate parks arc sufficiently warned of the risks by common knowledge of the sport, and by the warnings contained in signage and in the Agreement and Release of Liability. Neinstein v. L.A. Dodgers, Inc., 185 Cal. App. 3d 176, 184 (1986). However, the defense only covers normal risks inherent in the activity, not particular dangers of which participants would have no knowledge. See Celli v. Sports Car Club ofAmerica, 29 Cal. App. 3d 511, 522 (1972). Participants would presumably be aware of nonnal skateboarding tricks; however, they may not know of the dangers posed by extreme contests or games such as "crack the whip." Supervision could ensure that skate park activities would be restricted to those posing only the normal risks inherent in the sport.

Also, where negligent maintenance or supervision permits an unusually dangerous condition to continue, liability may arise. See Hairston v. Studio Amusements, Ltd., 86 Cal. App. 2d 735,739 (1948)(piaintiff fell while skating at defendant's roller skating rink, lay for several minutes without attention by guards, and was struck by a reckless patron skating backwards).

CONCLUSION

parks indicating that skateboarders failing to wear helmets, elbow pads and knee pads are subject to citation.

-4- 000113

April 30,2008 Honorable Mayor and City Council

115800 for skateboard parks in particular, the City remains liable for failure to guard or warn against known dangerous conditions or other hazardous recreational activities not reasonably assumed by the participant as inherently a part of skate park activities. Without staff supervision, it will be difficult for the City's skate parks to come within the limited statutory protection of these California statutes. Further, by making it more difficult to limit the nature of the skate park activities to those that pose risks normally associated with the sport, eliminating supervision may restrict the applicability of the defense of assumption of the risk.

MICHAEL J. AGUIRRE, City Attorney

By Kimberly Ann Davies Deputy City Attorney

KADxa cc: Andrea Tevlin, Independent,Budget Analyst Stacey LoMedico, Director, Park & Recreation Department Karen Heumann, Assistant City Attorney Kathryn Burton, Managing City Attorney

-5- - ATTORNEY TO CLIENT 0 0 0 i 10 CORRESPONDENCE

1 FOR CONFIDENTIAL USE ONLY Office of RECEIVED The City Attorney City of San Diego JUL 2 2007

MEMORANDUM pflri( -,. Q 'RscraatfonDepa.. MS 59 ra* And Rmsfion Departmeni

(619) 533-5800

DATE: June 18, 2007

TO: Stacey LoMedico, Park and Recreation Director

FROM: City Attorney

SUBJECT: Unsupervised Skate Parks

INTRODUCTION

Will the City expose itself to greater liability if it changes its operations at City skate parks from staff-supervised to unsupervised activities?

SHORT ANSWER

Yes. Without staff supervision, it will be difficult for the City's.skate parks to come within the limited statutory protection allowed hazardous recreational activities under California statute. Lack of supervision will make it more difficult for the City to guard against or warn of dangerous conditions, and to limit activities to those that pose only the nonnal risks associated with the sport. BACKGROUND

The Park and Recreation Department is considering changing its method of operation for its four skate parks (and for the two additional parks expected to open m the future). Currently, the skate parks are operated by City staff and are not open unless supervisory staff is on-site. Staff collects fees and liability waivers from participants. Staff also monitors skate park activities and enforces City rules and policies. June 18,2007 Stacey LoMedico, Park and Recreation Director Park and Recreation Department ·^ 000116'

ANALYSIS

I, The City's Limited Liability to Participants in "Hazardous Recreational Activities,' The California Tort Claims Act, California Government Code sections 810-996.6 governs actions at law for civil liability against public entities and their officers and employees. A public entity is not generally liable for an injury except as otherwise provided by statute. Cal. Gov't Code § 815, Iverson v. Muroc Unified School District (1995) 32 Cal.App. 4^ 218, 227. A public entity may be held liable for a dangerous condition of its property that creates a "reasonably foreseeable risk," if the dangerous condition was created by the negligent,act of an employee or the public entity had actual or constructive notice of the dangerous condition. Cal. Gov. Code § 845. California Government Code section 831.7 provides specific immunity from liability for injuries suffered on public property when the injuries arise out of a ''hazardous recreational activity," where the person "knew or reasonably should have known that the hazardous recreational activity created a substantial risk of injury."

The first question is whether skateboarding constitutes a "hazardous recreational activity" for purposes of section 831.7. We conclude that it does.

Section 831.7(b) contains a two-pronged definition of "hazardous recreational activity*'. The first paragraph defines the term as "...a recreational activity which creates a substantia] (as distinguished from a minor, trivial, or insignificant) risk of injury..." The second paragraph identifies certain activities that meet the definition (e.g., diving, animal riding, skiing). The two definitions are independent of one another. Although skateboarding is not specifically identified in the statute, caselaw has found, in effect, that skateboarding can be a hazardous recreational activity, depending on the circumstances. Bartell v. Palos Verdes Peninsula Sch. Dist. (1978) 83 Cal.App.3d 492 (12-year-old boy killed when he fell off his skateboard while playing a game similar to "crack the whip"); Iverson, supra, 81 Op. Atty. Gen. Cal. 331. The public entity would have to prove in each case that the particular activity created a substantial risk of injury to the participant.

-2- June 18,2007 Stacey LoMedico, Park and Recreation Director Park and Recreation Department 000117

However, even if skateboarding at a skate park is considered a hazardous recreational activity, the public entity would still have to rebut any allegations that it failed to guard against or warn of a known dangerous condition that was not reasonably assumed by the participant as inherently part of the activity. Cal. Gov. Code § 831.7(c)(1). Caselaw has interpreted the phrase "reasonably assumed" as based on an objective standard Perez v. Los Angeles (1994) 27 Cal.App.4th 1380, 1386. The phrase takes into consideration the lower standard of care that is expected of children. M The question is whether a reasonable person, or reasonable child of a given age, would assume that the dangerous condition at issue was part of nonnal skate park activity.

Whether the City supervises skate parks or not would have no bearing on whether skateboarding is a hazardous recreational activity under section 831.7; however, lack of supervision will make - it more difficult to guard against or warn of dangerous conditions not assumed to be part of the nonnal skate park activity — such as violent games (e.g., "crack ihe whip"), extreme contests, or fighting;

II. . The City's Conditional Immunity for Operating a Skateboard Park

In addition to the conditional immunity allowed for hazardous recreational activities discussed above, the Legislature has provided a special immunity for skateboard parks in Health and Safety Code section 115800. Under this section, skateboarding at skateboard parks operated by the City on City property will automatically be protected as a "hazardous recreational activity" under the immunity of Government Code section 831.7, if all of the three requirements of section 115800 are met: (1) the person skateboarding is 12 or older; (2) the activity was stunt, trick, or luge skateboarding; and (3) either the skate park requires the wearing of a helmet, elbow pads, and knee pads, or, with respect to a park run by a municipality that is not supervised on a regular basis, there is an ordinance requiring the wearing of a helmet, elbow pads, and knee pads, and posted signs to that effect.

Given that the nature of skateboarding activities at City skate parks falls within the "stunt, trick or luge" definition, given that existing SDMC sections require protective gear and signage, and, finally, assuming proper signag;e, skateboarding at City skate parks would fall under the conditional immunity of this section for skateboarders over 12 who are injured.

-3- June 18, 2007 Stacey LoMedico, Park and Recreation Director Park and Recreation Department 000118

Changing the operation of skate parks to unsupervised will not significantly lessen the immunity conferred by this statute (it specifically covers unsupervised skate parks), so, long as someone is present to check skateboarders? identification to ensure they are over twelve.

There is the argument that if the Cityprovides supervision at its skate parks, it may expose itself to more liability if an injury is caused by negligent supervision. In order to be liable under this theory, the City's actions or inactions would have to be grossly negligent. Cal.Gov. Code section 831.7(c)(5). While this is a valid argument, we believe the City is better protected from liability by operating skate parks that are as safe as possible.

III. The Defense of Assumption of the Risk

Finally, changing the operation of City skate parks to unsupervised may also lessen the protection offered by the doctrine of assumption of the risk and the legal effect of the Agreement and Release of Liability participants are required to sign. Assumption of the risk is-thc voluntary and knowing exposure of oneself tc obvious dangers in^dent to certHin a^ti^itie* S^^"Morfm*y> Cal. Sports Car Club (1958), 163 Cal.App.2d 685, 688. Skateboarders at City skate parks are sufficiently warned of the risks by common knowledge of the sport, and by the warnings contained in signage and in the Agreement and Release of Liability. Neinstein v. L.A. Dodgers (1986), 185 Cal.App.3d 176,184. However, the defense only covers normal risks inherent in the activity, not particular dangers of which participants would have no knowledge. See Celli v. Sports Car Club ofAmerica (1972) 29 Cal.App.3d 511, 522. Participants would presumably be aware of normal skateboarding tricks; however, they may not know of the dangers posed by extreme contests or games such as "crack the whip." Supervision could ensure that skate park activities would be restricted to those posing only the nonnal risks inherent in the sport.

Also, where neghgent maintenance or supervision permits an unusually dangerous condition to continue, liability may arise. See Hairston v. Studio Amusements (1948) 86 Cal.App.2d 735, 739 (plaintiff fell while skating at defendant's roller skating rink, lay for several minutes without attention by guards, and was struck by a reckless patron skating backwards).

CONCLUSION

The City will expose itself to greater liability if it changes operations at its skate parks to unsupervised. Although conditional, limited immunity is conferred under Caiifomia Government Code section 831.7 for hazardous recreational activities and Health and Safety, Code-section 115800 for skateboard parks in particular, the City remains liable for failure to guard or warn against known dangerous conditions or other hazardous recreational activities not reasonably assumed by the participant as inherently a part of skate park activities. Without staff supervision, it will be difficult for the City's skate parks to come within the limited statutory protection of these Caiifomia statutes. Further, by making it more difficult to limit the nature of the skate park

-.4- June 18,2007 Stacey LoMedico, Park and Recreation Director Park and Recreation Department C00119 activities to those that pose risks normally associated with the sport, eliminating supervision may restrict the applicability of the defense of assumption of the risk

MICHAEL J. AGUIRRE, City Attorney

By fA/fi^ 1 Kimberly Ann Davies Deputy City Attorney KAD;ca cc: Patty Jenks, Supervising Management Analyst, Park & Recreation Department

-5- C00121 Original Message From: [email protected] [mailto:[email protected]] Sent: Monday, November 17, 2 008 3:41 PM To: CLK City Clerk Subject: City Council Meeting Agenda Comment Form

San Diego City Council Meeting Agenda Comment Form Submitted on Monday, November 17, 2008 at 15:41:18

Name: Frances Pierce

Email: [email protected]

Address: 5375 El Noceh Way

City: San Diego

State: CA

Zip: 92124

Area Code: 858

Telephone: 279-8290

Source: San Diego City Council Meeting Agenda Comment Form at http://www.sandiego.gov/city-clerk/officialdocs/docketcomment.shtml

Agenda Item: November 19, 2008 2-5 pm

Comments: I urge the Mayor and council members to find another source of funding to balance the budget in place of closing 7 branch libraries for 5 years. Each branch library is a unique community asset.

REMOTE_ADDR: 198.180.31.12 HTTP_USER_AGENT; Mozilla/4.0 {compatible; MSIE 7.0; Windows NT 5.1; .NET CLR 1.0.3705) C00122 Original Message From: [email protected] [mailto;[email protected]] Sent: Monday, November 17, 2008 4:28 PM To: CLK City Clerk Subject: City Council Meeting Agenda Comment Form

San Diego City Council Meeting Agenda Comment Form Submitted on Monday, November 17, 2008 at 16:27:36

Name: Kaya de Barbaro

Email: kdebarbaro&gmail.com

Address: 3624 Texas St.

City: San Diego

State: CA

Zip: 92104

Source: San Diego City Council Meeting Agenda Comment Form at http://www.sandiego.gov/city-clerk/officialdocs/docketcomment.shtml

Ayenua IteiR: library closure";"?/meeting date 11/19/06

Comments: I woulci like to express my strong disagreement with the proposed closure of the libraries in several locations near where I live. I ask for finding measures to avoid the closure and provide the library services to these communities. Libraries are one of the very few places where less priviledged people can find Internet and resouce access and- taking this opportunity away will put these people at further disadvantage relative to others. I witnessed continued wait lines for the Internet access and feel that libraries need to expand those services instead of taking them away. I really urge the City Council to act to protect and improve those libraries. Respectfully, Kaya de Barbaro

REMOTE_ADDR: 198 .180.31.12 HTTP_USER_AGENT: Mozilla/4.0 (compatible; MSIE 7-0; Windows NT 5.1) C00123 Original Message From: [email protected] [mailto:[email protected]] Sent: Monday, November 17, 2008 4:31 PM To: CLK City Clerk Subject: City Council Meeting Agenda Comment Form

San Diego City Council Meeting Agenda Comment Form Submitted on Monday, November 17, 2008 at 16:31:28

Name: RoseAnn Denton

Email: [email protected]

Address: 2343 Burgener Blvd

City: San Diego

State: CA

Zip: 92110

Area Code: 619

Telephone: 276-1226

Source: San Diego City Council Meeting Agenda Comment Form at http;//www.sandiego.gov/city-clerk/officialdocs/docketcomment.shtml

Agenda I tem: SAVE CLAIREMONT BRANCH LIBRARY!!!

Comments: I understand that our neighborhood library {Clairemont Branch) is slated to be closed as part of the budget cuts proposed by Mayor Sanders. I am writing this letter to tell you that this library is the life of our neighborhood and to lose it for 1-5 years would be devestating blow to our community. My daugher is now 5 years old and we visit this library twice a week to check out books and attend storytime. Over the summer I assisted the children's librarian and counted well over 100 children and parents who were at weekly preschool/kindergarten programs. How can this be taken away from our kids? My daughter cried when I told her we might lose this library. The city budget must be balancedsome other way than making our CHILDREN pay the price for problems they did not create.

I will not stand back and let the city of san diego make such a bad decision. This is OUR city and this libraryishould not be a casualty of poor business decisions made by people who no longer are responsible for. the mess we are in.

RoseAnn Denton Bay Park Resident

REMOTE_ADDR: 198.180.31.12 HTTP_USER_AGENT: Mozilla/4.0 (compatible; MSIE 7.0; Windows NT 5.1) 000124 Original Message From: [email protected] [mailto:[email protected]] Sent: Monday, November 17, 2008 5:42 PM To: CLK City Clerk Subject: City Council Meeting Agenda Comment Form

San Diego City Council Meeting Agenda Comment Form Submitted on Monday, November 17, 2008 at 17:42:17

Name: Merilyn Britt

Email: [email protected]

Address: 4934 Northaven Avenue

City: San Diego

State: CA

Zip: 92110

Source: San Diego City Council Meeting Agenda Comment Form at http://www.sandiego.gov/city-clerk/officialdocs/docketcomment.shtml

Comments: Please do not close library branches. How. else to ask? Please do not take this measure.

REMOTE_ADDR: 198.180.31.12 HTTP_USER_AGENT: Mozilla/5.0 (Macintosh; U; PPC Mac OS X Mach-O; en-US, rv:1.8.1.18) Gecko/20081029 Firefox/2.0.0.18 C00125 Original Message . From: [email protected] [mailto:nsuserid©ada.sannet.gov] Sent: Monday, November 17, 2008 6:10 P M To: CLK City Clerk- Subject: City Council Meeting Agenda Comment Form

San Diego City Council Meeting Agenda Comment Form Submitted on Monday, November 17, 2008 at 18:09:33

Name: Kevin Lisson

Email: [email protected]

Address: 3392 via benito

City: san diego

State: ca

Zip: 92111

Area Code: 858

Telephone: 560-6505

Source: San-Diego City Council Meeting Agenda Comment Form at http://www.sandiego.gov/city-clerk/officialdocs/docketcomment.shtml

Agenda Item: Closing of the Clairemont branch library

Comments: I grew up attending the Clairemont library using it frequently as a student and in my adulthood. Now that I have kids we look forward to family library day. I'm not going to say please or beg youto keep the library open because it's your responsibility to keep these services open for the public. Don't take the easy way out! WHY NOT GIVE UP THE PADRES SKYBOX. I'm sure you can find alternatives rather than to cut our library.

REMOTE_ADDR: 198.180.31.12 HTTP_USER_AGENT: Mozilla/4.0 (compatible; MSIE 6.0; Windows NT 5.1; SV1; iebar; (none); .NET CLR 1.0.3705; . NET CLR 2.0.50727) 000126

Original Message From: [email protected] tmailto:[email protected]] Sent: Monday, November 17, 2008 6:11 PM To: CLK City Clerk Subject: City Council Meeting Agenda Comment Form

San Diego City Council Meeting Agenda Comment Form Submitted on Monday, November 17, 2008 at 18:10:51

Name: Bobbie Xuereb

Email: [email protected]

Address: 666 Upas St. #1003

City: San Diego

State: CA

Zip: 92103

Source: San Diego City Council Meeting Agenda Comment Form at http://www.sandiego.gov/city-clerk/officialdocs/docketcomment.shtml

Comments: Raise the sales tax and leave the libraries and rec centers alone. Let everybody share the pain not just certain neighborhoods. This is a time when libraries are a necessity, not a luxury.

REMOTE_ADDR: 10.21.1.138 HTTP_USER_AGENT: Mozilla/4.0 (compatible; MSIE 7.0; Windows NT 5.1; .NET CLR 1.1.4322; .NET CLR 2.0.50727; InfoPath.l) 000127 Original Message . From: [email protected] [mailto:nsuserid@£da.sannet.gov] Sent: Monday, November 17, 2008 7:16 PM To: CLK City Clerk Subject: City Council Meeting Agenda Comment Fofm

San Diego City Council Meeting Agenda Comment Form Submitted on Monday, November 17, 2008 at 19:15:41

Name: Roger Carr

Email; [email protected]

Address: 7356 Florey Court

City: San Diego

State: CA

Zip: 92122

Area Code: 858

Telephone: 622-1108

Source; San Diego City Council Meeting Agenda Comment Form at

http://www.sandiego.gov/city-clerk/officialdocs/docketcomment.shtml

Agenda Item: ITem #1 - ( as it relates Library Closures)

Comments: Dear Sir: While we deplore the financial fix that the city has inflicted upon itself (and'us) with its pension mess, the cancellation of basic taxpayer-paid services is simply not the right way to go. Contrary to recent remarks by the Mayor, in which he claims that "...We don't exist to fund employee pensions...", he i$ proposing to cut fundamental community services in order to do just that.

I reside in University City. My neighbors and I are deeply disturbed that the Mayor and City Council would capriciously and ill-advisedly press for closure of our community library.

The rationale is that the closure is proposed due to the ' lower utilization'. Compared to what? A big library in a big community? Or an expensive monstrosity like a central library th#t would be inaccessible to most of San Diego?

UC is a small community and the library is commensurate in size, and cost. In terms of actual utilization by the community, I would suggest that it is heavily used. A quick check of the City's own website shows that it was recently scheduled for exapnsion due to increased demand!

The UC Library is a key resource for the kids tftat attend 4 different schools that are easy walking distance to the library, even right across the 000128 street. It is a place of study and sanctuary for many of the kids who congregate there, every day, instead of wandering the streets. It is the only public facility in the vicinity, and many children attend this library every day. The library is a virtual annex to Curie Elementary School, especially critical to the schoolchildren since Curie's own library has already been reduced to a minimum by budget cuts.

There is a large and rapidly growing senior citizens retirement community in UC, just down the street from the library, and the seniors community is undergoing major expansion right now! The library is an anchor, a gathering place, and a source of affordable reading materials for our growing seniors ·population.

Parents and their children rely heavily upon this library. It has an excellent children's section, unlike others we have visited.

The Mayor and City Council should do the right thing and press for the continuation of this library for this community. Within District 1, UC always seems to be the community in the district that gets the short straw when it comes to allocation of public works.

We have asked f or little, and we get even less.

I call upon the i-iayor and City Council to rind their reductions in the root causes of these problems - the pension debacle.

If the city must close facilities, then target' the kinds of grandiose projects that typify the thinking that got the city into this mess. What is the City doing? It keeps a central public library in the budget, at a cost of millions, while attempting to close active, accessible and viable libraries in the community.

The UC library is small, has a small staff, and thus small expense, any closure would mean only token savings. The City should show real leadership, 'walk the talk', and nix grandiose pet projects right now.If they were truly sincere about obtaining significant savings, why not eliminate the central library and save big dollars? Why not take concrete actions, such as the Union-Tribune recently suggested, to pare city labor costs?

Do not penalize the taxpayers and do not penalise our community!

Sincerely, Roger Carr University City

REMOTE_ADDR; 198 .180.31.12 HTTP_USER_AGENT: Mo2illa/4.0 {compatible; MSIE 7.0; Windows NT 5.1; Mozilla/4.0 { compatible; MSIE 6.0; Windows NT 5.1; SV1) ; .NET CLR 2.0.50727} 000129 Original Message From: [email protected] [mailto:[email protected]] Sent: Monday, November 17, 2008 7:16 PM To: CLK City Clerk Subject: City Council Meeting Agenda Comment Form

San Diego City Council Meeting Agenda Comment Form Submitted on Monday, November 17, 2008-at 19:15:49

Name: Roger Carr

Email: [email protected]

Address: 7356 Florey Court

City: San Diego

State: CA

Zip: 92122

Area Code: 858

Telephone: 622-1108

Source: San Diego City Council Meeting Agenda Comment Form at http://www.sandiego.gov/city-clerk/officialdocs/docketcomment.shtml

Agenda Item; Item #1 - (as it relates Library Closures)

Comments: Dear Sir:

While we deplore the financial fix that the city has inflicted upon itself (and us) with its pension mess, the cancellation of basic taxpayer-paid services is simply not the right way to go.

Contrary to recent remarks by the Mayor, in which he claims that "...We don't exist to fund employee pensions...", he is proposing to cut fundamental community services in order to do just that. »

I reside in University City. My neighbors and I are deeply disturbed that the Mayor and City Council would capriciously and ill-advisedly press for closure of our community library.

The UC Library is a key resource for .the kids that attend 4 different schools that are easy walking distance to the library, even right across the 000130

street. It is a place of study and sanctuary for many of the kids who congregate there, every day, instead of wandering the streets. It is the only public facility in the vicinity, and many children attend this library every day.

The library is a virtual annex to Curie Elementary School, especially critical to the schoolchildren since Curie's own library has already been reduced to a minimum by budget cuts.

Parents and their children rely heavily upon this library. It has an excellent children's section, unlike others we have visited.

We have asked for little, and we get even less.

I call upon the Mayor and City Council to find their reductions in the root causes of these problems - the pension debacle.

If the city must close facilities, then target the kinds of grandiose projects that typify the thinking that got the city into this mess. What is the City doing? It keeps a central public library in the budget, at a cost of millions, while attempting to close active, accessible and viable libraries in the community.

The UC library is small, has a small staff, and thus small expense, any closure would mean only token savings. The City should show real leadership, 'walk the talk', and nix grandiose pet projectsright now. If they were truly sincere about obtaining significant savings, why not eliminate the central library and save big dollars? Why not take concrete actions, such as the Union-Tribune recently suggested, to pare city labor costs?

Do not penalize the taxpayers and do not penalize our community!

Sincerely, Roger Carr University City

REMOTE_ADDR: 198.180.31.12 HTTP_USER_AGENT: Mozilla/4.0 (compatible; MSIE 7.0; Windows NT 5.1; Mozilla/4.0 ( compatible; MSIE 6.0; Windows NT 5.1; SVl) ; .NET CLR 2.0.50727) 000131 Original Message From: nsuseridOada.sannet.gov [m ailto:[email protected]] Sent: Monday, November 17, 2008 7:52 PM To: CLK City Clerk Subject: City Council Meeting Agenda Comment Form

San Diego City Council Meeting Agenda Comment Form Submitted on Monday, November 17, 2008 at 19:52:06

Name: Diane BOGLE

Email: brianbogle©san.rr.com

Address: 2319 COWLEY WAY

City: SAN DIEGO

State: CA

Zip: 92110

Area Code: 619

Telephone :.v2;76-5968

Source: San Diego City Council Meeting Agenda Comment Form at http://www.sandiego.gov/city-clerk/officialdocs/docketcomment.shtml

Agenda Item: Clairmont Library Closing Nov.19th 2008

Comments: On behalf of our daughter who is in kindergarten this year along with her passion for learning to read we would like to send our request to PLEASE keep this library and learning facility open. Thank-You.

REMOTE_ADDR; 198.180.31.12 HTTP_USER_AGENT: Mozilla/5.0 (Macintosh; U; Intel Mac OS X 10_5_5; en-us) AppleWebkit/525.18 (K HTML, like Gecko) Version/3.1.2 Safari/525.20.1 000132 Original Message From: [email protected] [mailto:[email protected]] Sent: Monday, November 17, 2 008 7:52 PM To: CLK City Clerk Subject: City Council Meeting Agenda Comment Form

San Diego City Council Meeting' Agenda Comment Form Submitted on Monday, November 17, 2008 at 19:52:14

Name: Diane BOGLE

Email: [email protected]

Address: 2319 COWLEY WAY

City: SAN DIEGO

State: CA

Zip: 92110

Area Code: 619

Telephone: 276-5968

Source: San Diego City Council Meeting Agenda Comment Form at http://www.sandiego.gov/city-clerk/officialdocs/docketcomment.shtml

Agenda Item: Clairemont Library Closing Nov.19th 2008

REMOTE_ADDR: 198 .180.31.12 HTTP_USER_AGENT: Mozilla/S.O (Macintosh; U; Intel Mac OS X 10_5_5; en-us) AppleWebKit/525.18 ( KHTML, like Gecko) Version/3.1.2 Safari/525.20.1 000133 Original Message From: [email protected] [mailto:[email protected]] Sent: Monday, November 17, 2008 8:44 P M To: CLK City Clerk Subject: City Council Meeting Agenda Comment Form

San Diego City Council Meeting Agenda Comment Form Submitted on Monday, November 17, 2008 at 20:43:30

Name: Dana Belcher

Email: [email protected]

Address: 3130 Old Kettle Road

City; San Diego

State: CA

Zip: 92111

Area Code: 858

Telephone: 505-0122

Source: San Diego City Council Meeting Agenda Comment Form at http://www.sandiego.gov/city-clerk/officialdocs/docketcomment.shtml

Agenda Item: 11-19-08 Clairemont Library

Comments: I have heard that the City may be closing the Clairemont Library. I urge you not to do this. Our family uses this library on a weekly basis and we have greatly benefitted from its central location.

REMOTE_ADDR: 198.180.31.12 HTTP_USER_AGENT: Mozilla/4.0 (compatible; MSIE 7.0; Windows NT 5.1; SU 3.1 .NET CLR 1.0.3705; . NET CLR 1.1.4322; Media Center PC 4.0) 000134 Original Message From: [email protected] [mailto:[email protected]] Sent: Monday, November 17, 2008 8:54 PM To: CLK City Clerk Subject: City Council Meeting Agenda Comment Form

San Diego City Council Meeting Agenda Comment Form Submitted on Monday, November 17, 2008 at 20:53:54

Name: Heidi Martin

Email: heidilmartin©gmail.com

Address: 2534 Burgener Blvd.

City: San Diego

State: CA

Zip: 92110

Source: San Diego City Council Meeting Agenda Comment Form at http://www.sandiego.gov/city-clerk/officialdocs/docketcomment.shtml

Agenda Item: Noverrujer 13, 200o

Comments: I am writing to ask you to please spare the Clairemont Library when you are having to choose libraries to close down. It is a wonderful resource for all of those in the Clairemont area. As a mother of three, I feel that this library is vital to my children's upbringing and education. Please look to other areas of the budget when you are making cuts and keep Clairemont Library running.

Thank you, Heidi Martin Clairemont R esident

REMOTE_ADDR: 198.180.31.12 HTTP_USER_AGENT: Mozilla/5.0 (Windows; U; Windows NT 5.0; en-US; rv:1.8.1.17) Gecko/20080829 Firefox/2.0.0.17 000135 Original Message From: [email protected] [mailto:[email protected]] Sent: Monday, November 17, 2008 11:21 PM To: CLK City Clerk Subject: City Council Meeting Agenda Comment Form

San Diego City Council Meeting Agenda Comment Form Submitted on Monday, November 17, 2008 at 23:21:21

Name: Suzanne Geba

Email: [email protected]

Address: 6409 Caminito Estrellado

City: San Diego

State: CA

Zip: 92120

Area Code: 619

Telephone: 287-0456

Source; San Diego City Council Meeting Agenda Comment Form at http://www.sandiego.gov/city-clerk/officialdocs/docketcomment.shtml

Agenda Item: Wednesday, November 19, 2008, Library closures

Comments: The Allied Gardens Benjamin branch library should not be closed because it was built as a gift to the community funded by the Benjamin family. When a philanthropist gives monies for a specific purpose, it should not be taken away. The city government needs to look at other places to "save" money other than targeting libraries and parks and recreation facilities. These facilities are used by youth and citiizens in general for self improvement and enrichment and reflect an advanced culture. Persons without resources for books and computers use libraries and parks and rec services to advance themselves physically, educationally and culturally. Whereas it might appear that these services are "luxuries" that we can do without, in actuality the cost of discontinuing these services is much greater. To a culturedsociety, he 'costs of illiteracy, educational and cultural deprivation are gargantuan. Youths need these services to occupy their time constructively and our community needs centers of information, research and culture, especially in low and moderate income areas like Allied Gardens, Ocean Beach, Clairemont, etc. It would be less intrusive to target libraries in wealthy areas where residents have the means to buy books and computers and put their children in private recreational programs. Please do not close our libraries and limit parks and recreation programs and facilities.

REMOTE ADDR: 198.180.31.12 000136 Original Message From; nsuseridQada.sannet.gov [mailto:[email protected]] Sent: Tuesday, November 18, 2008 7:56 AM To: CLK City Clerk Subject: City Council Meeting Agenda Comment Form

San Diego City Council Meeting Agenda Comment Form Submitted on Tuesday, November 18, 2008 at 07:55:54

Name: cindy teal

Email: [email protected]

Address: 2418 Burgener Blvd

City: San Diego

State: CA

Zip: 92110

Area Code: 619

Telephone: 2753952

Source: San Diego City Council Meeting Agenda Comment Form at http://www.sandiego.gov/city-clerk/officialdocs/docketcomment.shtml

Agenda Item: Clairemont Library Closing

Comments: Neighborhood libraries offer the opportunity for elderly residents to walk to the facility, meet with groups and utilize computer services. Closing smaller branches puts an unbalanced burden on those who do not have transportation and who walk to their community branch. I walk the 3/4 of a mile to the clairemont branch each day during the summer. Recently, I read that OB, Clairemont and UH branches will be closed. This means that North Clairemont or Point Loma are the closest branches to Bay Park -- distances to these facilities are several miles -- Many elderly citizens will not be able to walk this distance and lose all opportunity for library service. Closing neighborhood facilities forces residents to drive to the larger branches. What if they do not have cars or cannot afford the time that it takes to take San Diego Public transportation? There has to be a better alternative. Libraries open a world of knowledge to all residents and should not be on a city's choppingblock.

REMOTE_ADDR: 198 .180.31.12 HTTP_USER_AGENT: Mozilla/4.0 (compatible; MSIE 6.0; Windows NT 5.0; .NET CLR 1.1.4322) 000137 Original Message From: [email protected] [mailto:[email protected]] Sent: Tuesday, November 18, 2008 9:27 AM To: CLK City Clerk Subject; City Council Meeting Agenda Comment Form

San Diego City Council Meeting Agenda Comment Form Submitted on Tuesday, November 18, 2008 at 09:26:31

Name: Paula Weil

Email: [email protected]

Address: 2351 burgener blvd

City: san diego

State: ca

Zip: 92110

Area Code: 619

Telephone: 881-0588

Source: San Diego City Council Meeting Agenda Comment Form at http://www.sandiego.gov/city-clerk/officialdocs/docketcomment.shtml

Agenda Item: Wed.nov 19th 2008 Closing of clairmont library

Comments: my family uses this library on a weekly bases. Please do not close.

REMOTE_ADDR: 198.180.31.12 HTTP_USER_AGENT: Mozilla/S.O (Windows; U; Windows NT 5.1; en-US; rv:1.8.1.17) Gecko/20080829 Firefox/2.0.0.17 000138 Original Message From: [email protected] [mailto:nsuserid@£da.sannet.gov] Sent: Tuesday, November 18, 2008 11:31 AM To; CLK City Clerk Subject; City Council Meeting Agenda Comment Fofm

San Diego City Council Meeting Agenda Comment F^rm Submitted on Tuesday, November 18, 2008 at 11:30:59

Name: Joan Funk

Email: [email protected]

Address: 5370 Burford Street

City: San Diego

State: CA

Zip: 92111

Source: San Diego City Council Meeting Agenda Comment Form at http://www.sandiego.gov/city-clerk/officialdocs/docketcomment.shtml

Ay-eu-id. X'C«.w. Li-utaiJ^ closures, I'IOM^uujtii; 13

Comments: Please do not close our branch libraries. They serve the elderly, the very young, families, everyone. There have got to be better places to cut spending than in this important service.

REMOTE_ADDR: 198.180.31.12 HTTP_USER_AGENT: Mozilla/4.0 (compatible; MSIE 7.0; Windows NT 5.1; .NET CLR 1.0.3705; .NET CLR 1.1.4322; Media Center PC 4.0) 000139 Original Message From: [email protected] [mailto;[email protected]] Sent: Tuesday, November 18, 2008 12:35 PM To: CLK City Clerk Subject: City Council Meeting Agenda Comment Form

San Diego City Council Meeting Agenda Comment Form Submitted on Tuesday, November 18;' 2008 at 12:35:21

Name: Ronald V Johnston

Email: [email protected]

Address: 4455 Arch St.

City: San Diego

State: CA

Zip: 92116

Area Code: 619

Telephone: 683-7 600

Source: San Diego City Council Meeting Agenda Comment Form at http://www.sandiego.gov/city-clerk/officialdocs/docketcomment.shtml

Agenda Item: 11/20/2008 Library closings

Comments: Our community libraries are being threatened by the financial morass that the City continues to languish in. Most specifically, the University Heights Library, the only information resource that is somewhat accessable to the 30,000+ residents of University Heights, including the students f rom Birney Academy, Roosevelt Jr. High, and San Diego High School, is being summarily threatened with closure. It is interesting to note that the neighborhood Library of our Mayor, in Kensington, is not so threatened, though the serviced community is less than half of the size of University Heights, as is the Mission Hills Library, which also services a much smaller population. Libraries are the foundation for learning and society and to close one, as vital as the University Heights Library, which has been seeking a larger home for a decade, is little short of criminal. Though small, and inadequate for the community, it is all that we have, for now. I cannot believe the the minimal staff and small overhead of this strategically placed and vitally important library in University Heights, one of the oldest and most historically important communities in San Diego, will make a financially meaningful contribution to saving the City money. The reality of the City's fiscal situation must be faced up to and the City Employee pension fund issue addressed in the only sound business manner that it can be addressed with and that is bankruptcy and reorganization. We, the homeowners and business owners of the University Heights community, are taxpayers, and voters, and we have a rightto expect the services that our tax dollars pay for, which are not restricted to "cops on the street", but are inclusive of libraries, decent, navigable streets, water systems that work, a fire department that can do the job, and City elected officials that 000140

represent our interests. Closing our only library DOES NOT REPRESENT OUR BEST INTERESTS!

Ronald V. Johnston, President, Annuity Ally, Inc., past President, University Heights Community Association, Past Chair of the University Heights Park and Rec. council. Chair, The University Heights Library Task Force.

TO: Major J. Sanders Council Representative Toni Atkins, Donna Frye, et al

REMOTE_ADDR: 198.180.31.12 HTTP_USER_AGENT: Moziila/4.0 (compatible; MSIE 7.0; Windows NT 5.1; InfoPath.l; .NET CLR 1.1.4322; MS-RTC LM 8) 000141 Original Message From: [email protected] [mailto:[email protected]] Sent: Tuesday, November- 18, 2008 12:53 PM To: CLK City Clerk Subject: City Council Meeting Agenda Comment Form

San Diego City Council Meeting Agenda Comment Form Submitted on Tuesday, November 18, 2008 at 12:53:21

Name: Chris Hearn

Email: tohearnsiayahoo . com

Address: 63 65 Mercer Street

City: San Diego

State: CA

Zip: 92122

Area Code: 858

Telephone: 558-2462

Source: San Diego City Council Meeting Agenda Comment Form at http://www.sandiego.gov/city-clerk/officialdocs/docketcomment.shtml

Agenda Item: Closing of University Community library.

Comments: Hello.

I urge the City Council to reconsider closing the University Community (University City) library.

The library is located a 5 minute walk diagonally from one elementary school. There -is another elementary school and middle school in the area.

The newer branch off Nobel and 805 is not an adequate substitute, as it is not within walking distance for all of these kids.

Thank you.

Chris Hearn

Jesus answered, "I am the way and the truth and the life. No one comes to the Father except through me." John 14:6

"I tell you the truth, whoever hears my word and believes him who sent me has eternal life and will not be condemned; he has crossed over from death to life." Jesus Christ in John 5:24

"But God demonstrates his own love for us in this: While we were still sinners, Christ died for us." Romans 5:8 000142

Original Message From: [email protected] [mailto:[email protected]] Sent: Tuesday, November 18, 2008 1:20 P M To: CLK City Clerk Subject: City Council Meeting Agenda Comment Form

San Diego City Council Meeting Agenda Comment Form Submitted on Tuesday, November 18, 2008 at 13; 20.-27

Name: Milo Worsham

Email: [email protected]

Address: 4571 Robbins St

City: San Diego

State: CA

Zip: 92122

Area Code: 858

Telephone: 552-0565

Source: San Diego City Council Meeting Agenda Comment Form at http://www.sandiego.gov/city-clerk/officialdocs/docketcomment.shtml

Agenda Item: Nov.19th 2PM - 5PM Special Joint Meeting: Budget and Council Committee of the Whole

Comments: I request that the University Community Library not be closed. Many students use this library after school, and the many seniors who live just down the street use it also. None of these people would have, access to the new North University City Library, which few people use now because it is not close to any school or senior citizens. With the School District budget cuts reducing or removing school library staff hours, the last thing we need to do is close the local library. This may apply to the other libraries that are proposed to be closed. In this time of budget cuts, the last thing to be sacrificed should be the libraries. If anyone cares about their community, they will not vote to close any libraries. I understand there is a proposed $20 million project to make a bridge to Petco Park. Please get your priorities s traight. All that would do is save people a 10 minute walk along the sidewalk. Please consider libraries are important and the bridge for example, is a waste. Thank you.

REMOTE_ADDR: 198.180.31.12 HTTP_USER_AGENT: Mo2illa/4.0 (compatible; MSIE 7.0; Windows NT 5.1; .NET CLR 1.0.3705; . NET CLR 1.1.4322; Media Center PC 4.0; . NET CLR 2.0.50727) 000143 Original Message From: [email protected] [mailto:nsuserid©ada.sannet.gov] Sent: Tuesday, November 18, 2 008 2:11 PM To: CLK City Clerk Subject: City Council Meeting Agenda Comment Form

San Diego City Council Meeting Agenda Comment Form Submitted on Tuesday, November 18, 2008 at 14:10:32

Name: Theresa Westermier

Address: 7834 Mission Bonita Dr.

City: San Diego ;

State: ca

Zip: 92120

Source: San Diego City Council Meeting Agenda comment Form at http://www.sandiego.gov/city-clerk/officialdocs/docketcomment.shtml

Agenda Item: closing libraries Nov. 19th, 2008

Cowlueuts: X do NOT waLlt Llie BeLLJciLalLi Librd-ry cloaea.. rne connaunrty needs this library.

REMOTE_ADDR: 198 .180.31.12 HTTP_JJSER_AGENT: Mo2illa/4.0 (compatible; MSIE 6.0; Windows NT 5.1; .NET CLR 1.1.4322) 000144 Original Message From: [email protected] [mailto:[email protected]] Sent; Tuesday, November 18, 2008 2:11 PM To: CLK City Clerk Subject: City Council Meeting Agenda Comment Form

San Diego City Council Meeting Agenda Comment Form Submitted on Tuesday, November 18, 2008 at 14:11:09

Name: Elizabeth Stiles

Email: [email protected]

Address; 8945 Lombard'Place No. 522

City: San Diego

State: CA

Zip: 92122

Source: San Diego City Council Meeting Agenda Comment Form at http://www.sandiego.gov/city-clerk/officialdocs/docketcomment.shtml

Agenda Item: A. Library and Recreation Center Closures. November 19, 200B

Comments: I strongly urge you to keep the University City Library open for use by the seniors and children in the immediate vicinity. This library is very important to the community.

REM0TE_ADDR: 198.180.31.12 HTTP_USER_AGENT: Mozilla/4.0 (compatible; MSIE 7.0; Windows NT 5.1; .NET CLR 1.1.4322; .NET CLR 2.0.50727; InfoPath.l; . NET CLR 3.0.04506.30; .NET CLR 3.0.04506.648) 000145 Original Message From: [email protected] [mailto:[email protected]] Sent; Tuesday, November 18, 2008 2:24 P M To: CLK City Clerk Subject; City Council Meeting Agenda Comment Form

San Diego City Council Meeting Agenda Comment Form Submitted on Tuesday, November 18, ,2008 at 14:24:06

Name: Elizabeth Hill

Email: [email protected]

Address: 6216 Agee St. #121

City: San Diego

State: CA

Zip: 92122

Source: San Diego City Council Meeting Agenda Comment Form at http://www.sandiego.gov/city-clerk/officialdocs/docketcomment.shtml

Comments: Do NOT balance the city budget by closing' the University Community Branch Library! It is a vital part of our "City of Villages". I chose my condo so that I could walk to this branch library for books, music CDs, music programs, childrens" story hours, discussion groups, etc. Shorten ALL library branch hours if need be, but do NOT close any branch libraries. They are the core of each San Diego community.

REMOTE_ADDR: 198.180.31.12 HTTP_USSR_AGENT: Mozilla/4.0 (compatible; MSIE 6.0; Windows.NT 5.1; SVl; YPC 3.2.0} C00146 Original Message From: [email protected] [mailto:nsuserid©ada.sannet.gov] Sent: Tuesday, November 18, 2008 2:27 PM To: CLK City Clerk Subject: City Council Meeting Agenda Comment Form

San Diego City Council Meeting Agenda Comment Form Submitted on Tuesday, November 18, 2008 at 14:26:41

Name: Barbara Terry

Address: 11414 Port Rush Row

City: San Diego

State: CA

Zip: 92128

Source: San Diego City Council Meeting Agenda Comment Form at http://www.sandiego.gov/city-clerk/officialdocs/docketcomment.shtml

Comments: I have lived in Carmel Mountain Ranch for-8 years and did not use our library but maybe 3 times a year. 4 years ago I had a little boy and now have a 1 year old girl. We have gone to the library every single week for the last 4 years and my son and daughter love books as well as the visit. It is so close to where we live and I know we would not drive to the next city to go every week. When my son is given a choiceto go to the Wild Animal Park, Sea Word or the Zoo ( we have annual passes to all) or the library; he ALWAYS chooses the library. He has always loved our visits, as well as checking out the books and reading them when we get home. If one child makes a difference then keeping open the library for this one will make a difference today as well as his future.

REMOTE_ADDR: 198.180.31.12 HTTP_USER_AGENT: Mozilla/4.0 (compatible; MSIE 7.0; Windows NT 6.0; SLCC1; .NET CLR 2.0.50727; . NET CLR 3.0.04506; InfoPath.2) 000147 Original Message From: [email protected] [mailto:[email protected]] Sent: Tuesday, November 18, 2008 2:31 PM To: CLK City Clerk Subject: City Council Meeting Agenda Comment Form

San Diego City Council Meeting Agenda Comment Form Submitted on Tuesday, November 18, 2008 at 14:31:04

Name: Pamela Wammes

Email: [email protected]

Address: 2103 Deerpark Drive

City: San Diego

State: CA

Zip: 92110-1107

Area Code; 619

Telephone: 840-5858

Source: San Diego City Council Meeting Agenda Comment Form at http://www.sandiego.gov/city-clerk/officialdocs/docketcomment.shtml

Agenda Item: Clairemont Library Spared

Comments: Please keep this useful resource in our neighborhood. I personally use the Library for school. This Library keeps this neighborhood quaint and educated. The children in the surrounding area utilize the Library for recreational reading. Don't we want to encourage smarter children and adults. Shouldn't we bail out great institutions like this instead of companies that know better. Maybe they didn't have a Library in their neighborhood. Do what you have to do to keep America reading.- It is a better activity than most.

REMOTE_ADDR: 198.180 .31.12 HTTP_USER_AGENT: Mozilla/4.0 (compatible; MSIE 7.0; Windows NT 5.1; MS-RTC EA 2} 000148 Original Message From: [email protected] [mailto:[email protected]] Sent: Tuesday, November 18, 2008 2:37 PM To: CLK City Clerk Subject: City Council Meeting Agenda Comment Form

San Diego City Council Meeting Agenda Comment Form Submitted on Tuesday, November 18, 2008 at 14:37:29

Name: Rita Wood

Email: [email protected]

Address: 3573 Mercer Ct

City: San Diego

State: CA

Zip: 92122

Area Code: 858

Telephone: 546 1946

Source: San Diego City Council Meeting Agenda Comment Form at http://www.sandiego.gov/city-clerk/officialdocs/docketcomment.shtml

Agenda Item: Spedial Joint Mtg re librairy closing

Comments: The UC librairy is one of the most used buildings in our community. Walkers, both senior and children, are in constant presence there along with the many bike riders and car driver patrons. If there is a budget amount that can be assigned to this librairy, I believe most of the 4700 UC homes would prefer that it be divided up and putinto our tax bills rather than deprive the community of this necessary resource.

REMOTE_ADDR: 198.180.31.12 HTTP_USER_AGENT: Mozilla/4.0 (compatible; MSIE 6.0; Windows NT 5.1; SVl; .NET CLR 2.0.50727) 000:149 Original Message From: [email protected] [mailto:[email protected]] Sent: Tuesday, November 18, 2008 3:42 PM To: CLK City Clerk Subject: City Council Meeting Agenda Comment Form

San Diego City Council Meeting Agenda Comment Form Submitted on Tuesday, November 18, 2008 at 15:41:41

Name: Susan Worsham

Email: susan@susaiiworsham. com

Address: 4571 Robbins St.

City: San Diego

State: CA

Zip: 92122

Area Code: 858

Telephone: 552-0565

Source: San Diego City Council Meeting Agenda Comment Form at http://www.sandiego.gov/city-clerk/officialdocs/docketcomment.shtml

Agenda Item: 11/18/2008 2:00pm Budget discussion

Comments: Please keep the UC library open.

The UC library is within walking distance of two large senior complexes: University City Village and the senior complex on Genesee Ave., and within easy driving access to all of South UC. It is within walking distance of four of the five UC schools { Curie, Spreckels, Standley Middle School and UC High School ( North UC library is not near to any school.)

The cost of closing the library far exceeds the cost savings of closing the library: · higher costs associated with increases in fire/paramedic response calls to seniors who are experiencing illness driven by depression from lack of community interaction, · higher costs associated with police response to crime from lack of community oversight as people park, walk and engage one another along Governor Drive, · higher school costs associated with increased drop out rates as middle school students don't have a safe place to go after school (not to mention higher costs associated with vandalism, crime, graffiti and pregnancy that can result from unsupervised teenagers).

The UC library is a key component of our ability to help make San Diego a safer, more educated, quality city.

REMOTE ADDR: 198.180.31.12 000150 Original Message From: [email protected] [ma'ilto:[email protected]] Sent: Tuesday, November 18, 2008 4:56 P M To: CLK City Clerk Subject: City Council Meeting Agenda Comment Form

San Diego City Council Meeting Agenda Comment Form Submitted on Tuesday, November 18, 2008 at 16:56:10

Name: David Frazee

Email: [email protected]

Address: 2558 Canyon Rd

City: Escondido

State: CA

Zip:- 92025

Area Code: 760

Telephone: 480-0278

Source: San Diego City Council Meeting Agenda Comment Form at http://www.sandiego.gov/city-clerk/officialdocs/docketcomment.shtml

Agenda Item: November 19, 2008, 2 pm

Comments: I don't believe enough brain power has gone into this five year proposal. Shut down the libraries for now, sure, but what is the future of San Diego? Planning should not be exclusively dollars and cents, but include a thorough cost/benefit analysis. Libraries provide a lot of return on investment amd losing them for five years after putting all that money into building them and hiring and training quality staff is a poor longterm strategy. Perhaps shutting down all but five libraries for a week each quarter would provide the same savings and make them easier to reopen in a year or two when a committee you appointhas prepared their report.

REMOTE_ADDR: 198.180.31.12 HTTP_USER_AGENT; Mozilla/4.0 (compatible; MSIE 6.0; Windows NT 5.1; SVl; .NET CLR 1 . 1.4322) 000151 Original Message From: [email protected] [mailto:[email protected]] Sent: Tuesday, November 18, 2008 5:29 P M To: CLK City Clerk Subject: City Council Meeting Agenda Comment Form

San Diego City Council Meeting Agenda Comment Form Submitted on Tuesday, November 18, 2008 at 17:28:37

Name: Yvonne Stewart

Address: 3665 martha street

City: San Diego

State: CA

Zip: 92117

Area Code: 858

Telephone: 731-4924

Source: San Diego City Council Meeting Agenda Comment Form at http://www.sandiego.gov/city-clerk/officialdocs/docketcomment.shtml

Agenda Item; Library Closures - November 19th

Comments: Please note that we are very concerned citizens of District 6 of the targeted Clairemont Burgener Street Library closure. This Library has been in our community f or 50 years! It services MANY schools, children and senior citizens that need this particular library. Please do not close this library. Our children and senior citizens will suffer. Has Mayor Jerry Sanders taken the time talk to the citizens and understand their needs? Thank you for your consideration.

REM0TE_ADDR: 198.180.31.12 HTTP_USER_AGENT: Mozilla/4.0 {compatible; MSIE 7.0; Windows NT 5.1; YPC 3.2.0; .NET CLR 1.1.4322) 000152 Original Message From: nsuserid©ada.sannet.gov [mailto:[email protected]] Sent: Tuesday, November 18, 2008 5:41 PM To: CLK City Clerk Subject: City Council Meeting Agenda Comment Form

San Diego City Council Meeting Agenda Comment Form Submitted on Tuesday, November 18, 2008 at 17:40:53

Name; sandra j buzan

Email: [email protected]

Address: 4631 Dakota Dr. #4

City: san diego, ca

State: ca'

Zip: 92117

Area Code: 502

Telephone: 727-6565

Source: San Diego City Council Meeting Agenda Comment Form at http://www.sandiego.gov/city-clerk/officialdocs/docketcomment.shtml Agenda Item: Closing Libraries 11-19-08

Comments: I have been using libraries all my life, at least 60 years. They are an invaluable part of education. Today at 5pm. I couldn't find a parking spot at the Clairmont Library, it is that busy. People of all ages use the library. It is great for senior citizens, as we learned to. read and still do and need less vigorous past times. Young children are there for story hour; which helps build a love for reading, and all other ages are there using computers, reading the newspapers and magazines, and of course searching for books, videos and tapes. What a great educational resource! During hard times we rely on it even more. Thereare even books.on how to save money! Where else do people go for an education, who can't afford college, trade school, or want to better themselves? Healthy family entertainment is also available. Computers are there for those of us who can't affordthem. Library's are a great resource for this city and serve everyone. It would be a shame to take resources you already have available and get rid of them. I would think with all the great thinkers in the city council, they could come up with a plan to revamp the services so we can save the library's. Let's not dumb down San Diego.

REMOTE_ADDR: 198 .180.31.12 HTTP_USER_AGENT: Mozilla/S.O (Macintosh;. U; PPC Mac OS X Mach-O; en-US; rv:l.8.1.18) Gecko/20081029 Firefox/2.0.0.18 000153 Original Message From: [email protected] [mailto:nsuserid©ada.sannet.gov] Sent: Tuesday, November 18, 2008 5:43 PM To: CLK City Clerk Subject: City Council Meeting Agenda Comment Form

San Diego City Council Meeting Agenda Comment Form Submitted on Tuesday, November 18', 2008 at 17:43:21

Name: Nancy Lawler

Email: [email protected]

Address: 4652 East Mt View Dr Apt C

City:.San Diego

State: Ca '

Zip: 92116

Area Code: 619

Telephone: 282-2929

Source: San Diego City Council Meeting Agenda Comment Form at http://www.sandiego.gov/city-clerk/officialdocs/docketcomment.shtml

Agenda Item: Item #1 November 19. 2008

Comments: Please do not close the Normal Heights Recreation Center. This is a low income nieghborhood. The kids need this recreation center for after school programs that the recreation center offers. If this center closes the kids will have nothing thing to do after school and then their will be more gangs, drugs, volience.

REMOTE_ADDR: 198.180.31.12 HTTP_USER_AGENT: Mozilla/4.0 {compatible; MSIE 7.0; Windows NT 5.1) 000154 Original Message From: nsuserid©ada.sannet.gov [mailto:[email protected]] Sent: Tuesday, November 18, 2008 7:15 P M To: CLK City Clerk Subject: City Council Meeting Agenda Comment Form

San Diego City Council Meeting Agenda Comment Form Submitted on Tuesday, November 18, 2008 at 19:14:42

Name: Doris Schilling

Email: [email protected]

Address: 2711 Deerpark Drive

City: San Diego

State: CA

Zip: 92110

Area Code: 619

Telephone: 276-0223

Source: San Diego City Council Meeting Agenda Comment Form at

http://www.sandiego.gov/city-clerk/officialdocs/docketcomment.shtml

Agenda Item: Clairemont Library Closure/Nov 19 2008

Comments: Dear City Council, Please don't close our library. My son Nicolas, who is 2 years old, uses this library weekly, and this would be very sad for him and our family. Libraries benefit everyone, especially the future of our children. I dearly hope that you can save money elsewhere instead of closing our library. We as a community should invest, especially into the education of our children! Sincerely, Doris Schilling { mother of Nicolas Schilling)

REMOTE_ADDR: 198.180.31.12 HTTP_USER_AGENT: Mozilla/S.O (Macintosh; U; Intel Mac OS X 10_5_3; en-us) AppleWebKit/525.18 (K HTML, like Gecko) Version/3.1.1 Safari/525.20 C00155 Original Message From: nsuserid©ada.sannet.gov [mailto:nsuserid©ada.sannet.gov] Sent: Tuesday, November 18, 2008 8:13 P M To: CLK City Clerk Subject; City Council Meeting Agenda Comment Form

San Diego City Council Meeting Agenda Comment Form Submitted on Tuesday, November 18, 2008 at 20:13:15

Name: Helga Conklin

Email: [email protected]

Address: 6845 Carthage St;

City: san Diego

State: cA

Zip: 92120

Area Code: 619

Telephone: 583-1897

Source: San Diego City Council Meeting Agenda Comment Form at http://www.sandiego.gov/city-clerk/officialdocs/docketcomment.shtml

Agenda Item: 1

Comments: I am very saddened by the possible closing of the Allied Gardens/Benjamin branch library. My children and I frequent it one to two times per week. While'we have just recently started looking around at the other libraries in San Diego, we have concluded our library is our favorite. We can stop there and check out books on our walks to the park. In these days of financial stress, it's been a blessing to be able to not use our car for entire days and to borrow a book, a cd, or dvd rather than purchase them. No money spent on days like that. Only our tax dollars. An d the public library in Allied Gardens is exactly where I like my tax dollars put.

REMOTE_ADDR: 198 .180.31.12 HTTP_USER_AGENT; Mozilla/S.O (Macintosh; U; Intel Mac OS X; en) AppleWebKit/523.12 ( KHTML, like Gecko) Version/3.0.4 Safari/523.12 000156 Original Message From: [email protected] [mailto:[email protected]] Sent: Tuesday, November 18, 2008 6:01 P M To: CLK City Clerk Subject: City Council Meeting Agenda Comment Form

San Diego City Council Meeting Agenda Comment Form Submitted on Tuesday, November 18, 2008 at 18:01:25

Name: Suzanna Flock

Email: [email protected]

Address: 4453 Camrose Ave

City: San Diego

State: CA

Zip: 92122

Area Code: 858

Telephone: 452-6203

Source: San Diego City Council Meeting Agenda Comment Form at http://www.sandiego.gov/city-clerk/officialdocs/docketcomment.shtml

Agenda Item: November 19, 2008 IBA Report 08-118

Comments: Please keep the San Diego City Branch library, located on Governor Drive, open. Over the years, our family has enjoyed the benefit of borrowing books and movies as well as attendingevents there. Although we are glad that a new library has been built, on Nobel, to service the UTC area, we in South UC do not usethat facility. The school age children and our large group of local seniors cannot walk to the Nobel branch so do rely on the Governor Drive Branch.

REMOTE_ADDR: 198.180.31.12 HTTP_USER_AGENT: Mozilla/4.0 (compatible; MSIE 7.0; Windows NT 6.0; FunWebProducts; SLCC1; .NET CLR 2.0.50727; . NET CLR'3.0.04506} 000157 Original Message · From: [email protected] [mailto:[email protected]] Sent: Tuesday, November 18, 2008 8:28 P M To: CLK City Clerk Subject: City Council Meeting Agenda Comment Form

San Diego City Council Meeting Agenda Comment Form Submitted on Tuesday, November 18, 2008 at 20:27:33

Name: Jane Doris

Email: [email protected]

Address: 3565 Mt. Abbey Ave.

City; San Diego

State: CA

Zip: 92111

Source: San Diego City Council Meeting Agenda Comment Form at http://www.sandiego.gov/city-clerk/officialdocs/docketcomment.shtml

Agenda Item: Nov, 19,2005 Special Joint Meeting: Budget and-Council Committee of the Whole.

Comments: Mayor Sanders and Council People, Please, please, please do not close our libraries. They are such an important part of our neighborhoods. The children need them, as do all the other people in the area. We love visiting our local library to find interesting and exciting books to read. I cannot believe that there is not an alternative way to save money. I truly think that there must be a better solution. Thank You, From a concerned Clairemont resident

REMOTE_ADDR: 198.180.31.12 HTTP_USER_AGENT: Mozilla/4.0 (compatible; MSIE 7.0; Windows NT 5.1; FunWebProducts; . NET CLR 2.0.50727) 000158

Original Message From: [email protected] [mailto:[email protected]] Sent; Tuesday, November 18, 2008 9:57 P M To: CLK City Clerk Subject: City Council Meeting Agenda Comment Form

San Diego City Council Meeting Agenda Comment Form Submitted on Tuesday, November 18, 2008 at 21:56:52

Name: Robert and Joan Reese

Address: 10886 Aviary Court

City; San Diego

State: CA

Zip: 92131

Area Code: 858

Telephone: 695-2460

Source: San Diego City Council Meeting Agenda Comment Form at http://www.sandiego.gov/city-clerk/officialdocs/docketcomment.shtml

Agenda Item: Non-agenda Public Comment, November 19, 2008

Comments: Once again our library system is targeted to take a disproportionate share of proposed cuts. Libraries provide a vital community service. Closure of the 7 branch libraries proposed by Mayor Sanders would negatively affect every library patron in our city. Students and seniors who currently can access their branch library without relying on a car, in particular, will feel the impact of not having a library in their community. Libraries provide a lifeline for many senior citizens who otherwise would be isolated, a safety net for schoolchildren and teens who rely on this safe haven after school to obtain homework help and use the · computers and books, and an important resource for individuals seeking employment. In lean economic times, library circulation historically increases ( it's already up 8% in the past 3 months!); fewer books in circulation citywide will have negative consequences for all library users. Most branches proposed for closure have active Friends of the Library groups who donate countless hours of volunteer assistance and raise tens of thousands of dollars each year for new books and media as well as for library improvements, and maintenance. Our city and its citizens will be poorer for the loss of their involvement.

REM0TE_ADDR: 198.180.31.12 HTTP_USER_AGENT: Mozilla/5.0 {Windows; U; Windows NT 5.1; en-US; rv:1.9.0.4) Gecko/2008102920 Firefox/3.0.4 000159

Original Message From: nsuseridQada.sannet.gov [mailto:nsuserid©ada.sannet.gov] Sent: Tuesday, November 18, 2008 10:40 PM To; CLK City Clerk Subject: City Council Meeting Agenda Comment Form

San Diego City Council Meeting Agenda Comment Form Submitted on Tuesday, November 18, 2008 at 22:39:57

Name: Jacquelyn Lily Turner

Address: 3832 Carson St.

City: San Diego

State: CA

Zip: 92117

Area Code: 858

Telephone: 616.8555

Source: San Diego City Council Meeting Agenda Comment Form at http://www.sandiego.gov/city-clerk/officialdocs/docketcomment.shtml

Agenda Item: Library closures/Weds Nov 19, 2008

Comments: Please keep our libraries open!! Libraries are one of our most valuable resources, and one of the most important ways to upgrade our society. Closing libraries would severely degrade our quality of life. Please help keep minds expanding!

REM0TE_ADDR: 198.180.31.12 HTTP_USER_AGENT; Mozilla/4.0 (compatible; MSIE 6.0; Windows NT 5.1; SVl) 000160 Original Message From: nsuserid©ada.sannet.gov [mailto:nsuserid©ada.sannet.gov] Sent: Tuesday, November 18, 2008 10:41 PM To: CLK City Clerk Subject: City Council Meeting Agenda Comment Form

San Diego City Council Meeting Agenda Comment Form Submitted on Tuesday, November 18, 2008 at 22:41:04

Name: Lowell Waxman

Email: [email protected]

Address: 4530 Idaho St #4

City: San Diego

State: CA

Zip: 92116

Area Code: 619

Telephone: 563-6079

Source: San Diego City Council Meeting Agenda Comment Form at http://www.sandiego.gov/city-clerk/officialdocs/docketcomment.shtml

Agenda Item: item 1 Nov 19, 2008

Comments: Per the City of San Diego General Plah (PF-40}:

The library system is a primary steward of the diverse cultural heritage of the San Diego community and of the enduring elements of world civilization; it is a portal' to the world around us. It is a vital learning presence in the community, providing information objectively and offering lifelong learning opportunities to every citizen through the system's Central Library and 35 branches.

I urge the Council, not to act in haste -- do not immediately close-public libraries and recreation centers -- but defer tfte decision to take such a radical step until all alternatives have been explored and thoroughly evaluated. This is especially important because while such closures pertaining to libraries are initially described as temporary suspension of service, all indications are that closures will essentially result in their permanent demise as they will lose long term viability and functionality. Libraries are living entities that cannot viably be put in long term comas without damage to their vital organs -- their collections. Empty shells do not a library make. Books, librarians and community make libraries.

Action taken in haste will do irreparable harm.

REMOTE ADDR: 198.180.31.12 000161 Original Message From: [email protected] [mailto:nsuserid©ada.sannet.gov] Sent: Tuesday, November 18, 2008 11:12 PM To: CLK City Clerk Subject: City Council Meeting Agenda Comment Form

San Diego City Council Meeting Agenda Comment Form Submitted on Tuesday, November 18, 2008 at 23:12:16

Name: ANNA GRACE DANIELS

Email: [email protected]

Address: 4084 45th Street

City: San Diego

State: CA

Zip: 92105

Area Code; 619

Telephone: 563-8090

Source: San Diego City Council Meeting Agenda Comment Form at http://www.sandiego.gov/city-clerk/officialdocs/docketcomment.shtml

Agenda Item: Item -1 November 19, 2008

Comments: Politicians come and go, but the constant in our civic life, in our communities is the library, the park and rec system. If politicians truly work for the good of the people, their legacy is the continuation into succeeding generations of our libraries and parks and recreation programs.

I am asking'the council members to truly serve us, the people, by rejecting the mayor's proposed budget cuts to our libraries and park and rec; to look outside of those departmental budgets for sources of stop-gap funding {I do not support using Library Facility Program funds- that is like borrowing from peter to pay peter, which is as we all know, a loss) and to take the time necessary to protect and continue these core services even in these difficult economic t imes. No more cuts! Books, librarians and community make a library; Trees and playing fields and rec leaders and community make a park and rec system. This is what lies at the heart of what we valuein our civic life. Please don't forget that.

REMOTE_ADDR: 198.180.31.12 HTTP_USER_AGENT: Mozilla/S.O (Windows; U; Windows NT 6.0; en-US; rv:1.9.0.4) Gecko/2008102920 Firefox/3.0.4 000162 Original Message From: nsuserid©ada.sannet.gov [mailto:nsuserid©ada.sannet.gov] Sent: Wednesday, November 19, 2008 4:29 AM To: CLK City Clerk Subject: City Council Meeting Agenda Comment Form

San Diego City Council Meeting Agenda Comment Form Submitted on Wednesday, November 19, 2008 at 04:29:14

Name: Erin Wilson

Address: 3509 Meade Ave

City: San Diego

State: CA

Zip: 92116

Area Code: 619

Telephone: 521-0677

Source: San Diego City Council Meeting Agenda Comment Form at http://www.sandiego.gov/city-clerk/officialdocs/docketcomment.shtml

Agenda Item: #1, November 19, 2008

Comments: Why should the library have to pay out of the Library Facilities Improvement P rogram? There should be NO cuts, NO closures, NO layoffs. Take as much time as you need to figure this out. It is simply unfair to a city to make cuts BEFORE getting all the pay offs from other business deals or WITHOUT raising the T.O.T.

Get with it! Don't penalize the whole city!

REM0TE_ADDR: 198.180.31.12 HTTP_USER_AGENT: Mozilla/S.O (Macintosh; U; PPC Mac OS X 10.5; en-US; rv:1.9.0.4) Gecko/2008102920 Firefox/3.0.4 C00163

Original Message From: [email protected] [mailto:[email protected]] Sent: Wednesday, November 19, 2008 6:40 AM To: CLK City Clerk Subject: City Council Meeting Agenda Comment Form

San Diego City Council Meeting Agenda Comment Form Submitted on Wednesday, November 19, 2008 at 06:40:05

Name: Allen Olson

Email: [email protected]

Address: 5055 Via Papel

City: San Diego

State; CA

Zip: 92122

Area Code: 858

Telephone; 455-1152

Source: San Diego City Council Meeting Agenda Comment Form at http://www.sandiego.gov/city-clerk/officialdocs/docketcomment.shtml

Agenda Item: #1, 11/19/2008

Comments: I am not in favor of closing the UC library. Please vote NO on library closure in UC. This is an important and much utilized facility in our community. Our children use it for school related studies and adults, such as myself, use it as well.

REMOTE_ADDR: 198.180.31.12 HTTP_USER_AGENT: Mozilla/4.0 (compatible; MSIE 7.0; Windows NT 5.1; .NET CLR 1.1.4322; .NET CLR 2.0.50727; . NET CLR 3.0.04506.30; .NET CLR 3.0.04506.648) 000164 Original Message From: nsuserid©ada.sannet.gov [mailto:nsuserid©ada.sannet.gov] Sent: Wednesday, November 19, 2008 7:12 AM To: CLK City Clerk Subject: City Council Meeting Agenda Comment Form

San Diego City Council Meeting Agenda Comment Form Submitted on Wednesday, November 19, 2008 at 07:11:38

Name: Buffy Budz

Email: [email protected]

Address: 3406 Nile Street

City: San Diego

State: CA

Zip: 92104

Source: San Diego City Council Meeting Agenda1 Comment Form at http://www.sandiego.gov/city-clerk/officialdocs/docketcomment.shtml

Agenda Item: wl 11/19/2003

Comments: Please defer a decision on closures in libraries until a comprehensive multi-year plan is brought t o the city council.

No branch closures, no library cuts, no staff layoffs- find the money somewhere else! Take the time to make the right decision. Thank you.

REMOTE_ADDR: 198.180.31.12 HTTP_USER_AGENT: Mozilla/S.O (Macintosh; U; Intel Mac OS X 10.5; en-US; rv:1.9.0.4) Gecko/2008102920 Firefox/3.0.4 000165 Original Message From; [email protected] [mailto:nsuserid©ada.sannet.gov] Sent: Wednesday, November 19, 2008 7:31 AM To: CLK City Clerk Subject: City Council Meeting Agenda Comment Form

San Diego City Council Meeting Agenda Comment Form Submitted on Wednesday, November 19, 2008 at 07:30:54

Name: j an kaufman

Email; [email protected]

Address: 3077 Lloyd St.

City: San Diego

State: CA

Zip: 92117

Area Code: 858

Telephone: 274-2869

Source: San Diego City Council Meeting Agenda Comment Form at http://www.sandiego.gov/city-clerk/officialdocs/docketcomment.shtml

Agenda Item: Burgener St. library - Clairemont

Comments: This small neighborhood library serves a large portion of Clairemont... it's always very busy with young people, adults and senior citizens. It serves a cross section of the citizens...ones that pay taxes to keep it open and running. Why are the srvices for ordinary citizens cut first? Maybe it's because we are so busy trying to make ends meet that we can't attend your meetings so the Mayor can't hear us??!!

REM0TE_ADDR: 198.180.31.12 HTTP_USER_AGENT: Mozilla/4.0 (compatible; MSIE 7.0; Windows NT 5.1; FunWebProducts; .NET CLR 1.0.3705; . NET CLR 1.1.4322; Media Center PC 4.0} 000166 Original Message From: [email protected] [mailto:[email protected]] Sent: Wednesday, November 19, 2008 8:09 AM To: CLK City Clerk Subject: City Council Meeting Agenda Comment Form

San Diego City Council Meeting Agenda Comment Form Submitted on Wednesday, November 19, 2008 at 08:08:40

Name: Shelia Padgett

Email: [email protected]

Address: 5318 Waring Road

City: San Diego

State; CA

Zip: 92120

Area Code: 619

Telephone: 287-2682

Source: San Diego City Council Meeting Agenda Comment Form at http://www.sandiego.gov/city-clerk/officialdocs/docketcomment.shtml

Agenda Item: Nov 19, Budget & Finance Committee & Council Meeting

Comments: I will attend the Budget & Counci meeting on Nov 19th and present my written comments, and will request to speak at that time as well.

REMOTE_ADDR: 198.180.31.12 HTTP_USER_AGENT: Mozilla/4.0 {compatible;'MSIE 7.0; Windows NT 6.0; SLCC1; .NET CLR 2.0.50727; Media Center PC 5.0; . NET CLR 3.0.04506) 000167 Original Message From: [email protected] [mailto:[email protected]] Sent: Tuesday, November 18, 2 008 9:57 P M To: CLK City Clerk Subject: City Council Meeting Agenda Comment Form

San Diego City Council Meeting Agenda Comment Form Submitted on Tuesday, November 18, 2008 at 21:56:52

Name: Robert and Joan Reese

Email: [email protected]

Address: 10886 Aviary Court

City; San Diego

State: CA

Zip: 92131

Area Code: 858

Telephone: 695-2460

Source: San Diego City Council Meeting Agenda Comment Form at http;//www.sandiego.gov/city-clerk/officialdocs/docketcomment. shtml

Agenda Item: Non-agenda Public Comment, November 19, 2008

Comments: Once again our library system is targeted to take a disproportionate share of proposed cuts. Libraries provide a vital community service. Closure of the 7 branch libraries proposed by Mayor Sanders would negatively affect every library patron in our city. Students and seniors who currently can access their branch library without relying on a car, in particular, will feel the impact of not having a library in their community. Libraries provide a lifeline for many senior citizens who .otherwise would be isolated, a safety net for schoolchildren and teens who rely on this safe haven after school to obtain homework help and use the computers and books, and an important resource for individuals seeking employment. In lean economic times, library circulation historically increases ( it's already up 8% in the past 3 months!); fewer books in circulation citywide will have negative consequences for all library users. Most branches proposed for closure have active Friends of the'Library groups who donate countless hours of volunteer assistance and raise tens of thousands of dollars each year for new books and media as well as for library improvements and maintenance. Our city and its citizens will be poorer for the loss of their involvement.

REM0TE_ADDR: 198.180.31.12 HTTP_USER_AGENT: Mozilla/S.O (Windows; U; Windows NT 5.1; en-US; rv:1.9.0.4} Gecko/2008102920 Firefox/3.0.4 fiot t> A &\ nt cfL % j 000168 Original Message From: [email protected] [mailto:[email protected]] Sent: Wednesday, November 19, 2008 9:08 AM To: CLK City Clerk Subject: City Council Meeting Agenda Comment Form

San Diego City Council Meeting Agenda Comment Form Submitted on Wednesday, November 19, 2008 at 09:08:00

Name: JoEllyn Mascarenhas

Email: [email protected]

Address: 13048 Wimberly Sq, # 30

City: S an.Diego

State: CA

Zip: 92128

Area Code: 858

Telephone: 748-6102

Source: San Diego City Council Meeting Agenda Comment Form at http://www.sandiego.gov/city-clerk/officialdocs/docketcomment.shtml

Agenda Item: #1, 11/19/08

Comments: Please don't close our libraries!! I remember when the Carmel Mt. Ranch branch 'first opened. We were so excited to see the sky lights to reduce lighting costs, and the easy to find what you are looking for arrangement. The staff is always knowledgeable and friendly. They know my children by name and remember what interests them and are able to suggest books easily. They know me too, and the other adults who are regularly there. Please please find another way to save money. We can't afford the cost of new books, and my son reads at least 3 or 4 novels per day. I could never keep up with that! The library is our lifeline. Please please seek other cost cutting or revenue increasing methods. No holiday decorations on public street lights No street cleaning on residential s treets No new landscaping on roadways Stop funding new sculptures for the downtown area, and let the ones there stay longer (I love art, but the art in these locations only support those in that area - you are talking about closing one library in every district.) Salary cuts of 5% for the top city salaries {cutting libraries and parks doesn't effect the rich as much as the rest of us - why should we feel the pain alone?) Salary freeze for all city employees until publicservices are restored Increase fees - $5 to renew library card or rec center card; $5 for parking at Balboa park; Assess the neighborhoods served by the libarary or park a $5 fee to keep them open. Hold a bake sale, I don't know- butPlease keep searching for better ways to save or increase monies. Please help us save our libraries. 000169 Original Message From: [email protected] [mailto:[email protected]] Sent; Wednesday, November 19, 2008 10:46 AM To: CLK City Clerk Subject: City Council Meeting Agenda Comment Form

San Diego City Council Meeting Agenda Comment Form Submitted on Wednesday, November 19, 2008 at 10:46:21

Name: Richard Gorin

Email: [email protected]

Address: 3560 1st Av #19

City: San Diego

State: CA

Zip: 92103

Source: San Diego City Council Meeting Agenda Comment Form at http://www.sandiego.gov/city-clerk/officialdocs/docketcomment.shtml

Agenda Item; Budget meeting November 15, 2008

Comments: University Heights is my branch library of choice. I'd hate to see it closed. Nonetheless, I think it only fair that those protesting the close indicate what other services that they actually use.they'd be willing to give up, or what taxes that they'd actually pay should be levied. It's too easy to suggest cutting back programs that don't benefit me (or those I'd lilke to repeal anyway), or to raise taxes that I won't be liable for (city trash pickup is one that glares-at me). if closing my library is my part of the shared sacrifice, I'll accept that. But I look to the rest of the citizenry to make their sacrifices as well.

REM0TE_ADDR: 198.180.31.12 HTTP_USER_AGENT: Mozilla/5.0 (Windows; U; Windows NT 5.1; en-US; rv:l.9.0.4) Gecko/2008102920 Firefox/3.0.4 000170

Original Message From: [email protected] [mailto:[email protected]] Sent: Wednesday, November 19, 2008 10:56 AM To: CLK City Clerk Subject: City Council Meeting Agenda Comment Form

San Diego City Council Meeting Agenda Comment Form Submitted on Wednesday, November 19, 2008 at 10:55:39

Name: Ellen Fager

Emai1: [email protected]

Address: 5373 Via Carancho

City; San Diego

State; CA

Zip: 92111

Source: San Diego City Council Meeting. Agenda Comment Form at http://www.sandiego.gov/city-clerk/officialdocs/docketcomment.shtml

Agenda Item: Budget 11/19/08

Comments: Please do not close our neighborhoodlibraries!

My library, Clairemont, has been the heart of our community for 50 years. It has meant Storytime for toddlers, an afterschool refuge for schoolchildren, a research resource for jobseekers, a place for all of us to check out a book, some music, maybe a movie. Our neighborhood library is a place where people of all ages and from all levels of the socioeconomic scale come together in pursuit of knowledge and the small pleasures that make life worthwhile, and that is a rare and precious thing. In hard economic times like these, -we need our libraries - every one of them - more than ever.

Surely, in the vastness of the City budget, some other department can be found more able to absorb a $2 million cut than the libraries, already struggling with reduced staffing and reduced hours from the last round of cuts. But, if there is truly no other place to cut, then RAISE MY TAXES, PLEASE!!! Trash hauling fees, utility tax, increased sales tax - do whatever it takes. Libraries mean equal access to information for all the citizens of San Diego, and that is something well worth paying for.

REM0TE_ADDR: 198.180.31.12 HTTP_USER_AGENT: Mozilla/5.0 {Macintosh; U;.PPC Mac OS X; en) AppleWebKit/312.9 (KHTML, like Gecko) Safari/312.6 000171 Original Message From; [email protected] [mailto:[email protected]] Sent: Wednesday, November 19, 2008 11:03 AM To: CLK City Clerk Subject: City Council Meeting Agenda Comment Form

San Diego City Council Meeting Agenda Comment Form Submitted on Wednesday, November 19, 2008 at 11:02:43

Name: Pat Cramer

Address: 3581 Millikin Ave

City: San Diego

State: CA

Zip: 92122 .

Source: San Diego City Council Meeting Agenda Comment Form at http://www.sandiego.gov/city-clerk/officialdocs/docketcomment.shtml

Agenda Item: Nov.19, IBA08-118 closing libraries

newer branch off of Nobel, which UC residents would have to drive to. Many senior citizens use it { who would not likely use the new branch), and of course the children in UC use it every day, especially on Wednesdays when they have a half day. They would definitely not be using the new branch as they could not get to it. The new branch is nowhere near any schools or senior citizen residences. It is a drive-to destination which few people are using, and those who do are-mostly in the evening.

REMOTE_ADDR: 198 .180.31 .-12 HTTP_USER_AGENT: Mozilla/4.0 (compatible; MSIE 6.0; Windows NT 5.1; SVl; .NET CLR 1.1.4322; . NET CLR 2.0.50727) 000172 Original Message From: nsuserid©ada.sannet.gov [mailto:[email protected]] Sent: Wednesday, November 19, 2008 11:42 AM. To: CLK City Clerk Subject: City Council Meeting Agenda Comment Form

San Diego City Council Meeting Agenda Comment Form Submitted on Wednesday, November 19, 2008 at 11:41:49

Name: JoAnn Howard

Email: [email protected]

Address:. 13770 Stoney Gate Place

City: San Diego

State: CA

Zip: 92128

Area Code: 858

Telephone: 4517804

Source: San Diego City Council Meeting Agenda Comment Form at http://www.sandiego.gov/city-clerk/officialdocs/docketcomment.shtml

Agenda Item: Library Closings

Comments: I strongly object to the closing of any library, most of all the Carmel Mountain Library branch. This facility is a jewel in our community, Please reconsider closure and reduce hours across the board rather than taking away our community library.

REM0TE_ADDR: 198 .180.31.12 HTTP_USER_AGENT: Mozilla/4.0 (compatible; MSIE 7.0; Windows NT 5.1; .NET CLR 1.1.4322; IEMB3; IEMB3} 000173 Original Message From: [email protected] [mailto:[email protected]] Sent: Wednesday, November 19, 2008 12:13 PM To: CLK City Clerk Subject: City Council Meeting Agenda Comment Form

San Diego City Council Meeting Agenda Comment Form Submitted on Wednesday, November 19, 2008 at 12:12:39

Name: Emma Cook

Email: [email protected]

Address: 3020 Cowley Way #C209

City: San Diego

State: CA

Zip: 92117

Source: San Diego City Council Meeting Agenda Comment Form at http://www.sandiego.gov/city-clerk/officialdocs/docketcomment.shtml

Agenda I'ceiu: Library Closing Nuvejiiber 13bh

Comments: The libraries provide sustenance .to all of our neighborhoods in San Diego. I can't come up with any other city service that supports people of all ages, races, socio-economic classes, etc. The library has facilitated my career during a time that I didn't have a pc in my home. The library provides opera DVDs for my home bound mom and thus gives her pleasure despite the darkness of illness. Just visiting the library is enough to make me feel better; maybe it is all of the knowledge and experiences that are present within the walls via books, cds, and videos. PLEASE look elsewhere for these cuts. Our libraries, all of them are crucial to the good health of our city. Any time the hours get cut, wefeel that. I don't think we would be able to recover if you closed ANY of our branches!!!!

REMOTE_ADDR: 198.180.31.12 HTTP_USER_AGENT: Mozilla/4.0 (compatible; MSIE 7.0; Windows NT 5.1; .NET CLR 1.1.4322; InfoPath.2; . NET CLR 2.0.50727; . NET CLR 3.0.04506.30; .NET CLR 3.0.04506.648) 000174 Original Message From: [email protected] [mailto:[email protected]] Sent: Wednesday, November 19, 2008 1:58 P M To: CLK City Clerk Subject; City Council Meeting Agenda Comment Form

San Diego City Council Meeting Agenda Comment Form Submitted on-Wednesday, November 19, 2008 at 13:58:06

Name: Chiyomi W ellington-Oguri

Address: 2538 Arnott St.

City: San Diego

State: CA

Zip; 92110

Source: San Diego City Council Meeting Agenda Comment Form at http://www.sandiego.gov/city~clerk/officialdocs/docketcomment.shtml

Agenda Item: library c losure—11/19/08

economy, it is becoming very busy. In times such as these, we need our · neighborhood facilities more than ever. Please don't close our library!

REM0TE_ADDR: 198.180.31.12 HTTP_USER_AGENT: Mozilla/S.O (Windows; U; Windows NT 6.0; en-US; rv:1.9.0.3) Gecko/2008092417 F irefox/3.0.3 (.NET CLR 3.5.30729) BUDGET NOV 19Z008 n G00175

Original Message From: [email protected] [mailto:[email protected]] Sent: Friday, November 14,' 2008 7:05 AM To; CLK City Clerk Subject: City Council Meeting Agenda Comment Form

San Diego City Council Meeting Agenda Comment Form Submitted on Friday, November 14, 2008 at 07:05:02

Name: Audrey D. Keane ^

Email; [email protected]

Address: 8141 El Paseo Grande

City: La Jolla

State: CA

Zip: 92037

Source: San Diego City Council Meeting Agenda Comment Form at http://www.sandiego.gov/city-clerk/officialdocs/docketcomment.shtml

Agenda Item: FY2009 Budget Amendments - 11/19 of 11/20

Comments: We recognize that the City has a deficit and that the money must come from somewhere.

PROPOSED SOLUTION - Increase tuition for the Jr Lifeguard program by $150 per 4 week session, netting an additional $165,000 to cover the budget for the organizer ($109,489). The overage could be used to pay for scholarships to cover students who truly cannot afford the basic tuition or the tuition increase. There is a high demand for the Jr. Lifeguard program - the sessions sell out in one day!

As you know, the proposed budget cuts including the elimination of the position of Organization Effectiveness Specialist III will result in the cancellation of San Diego's world-renowned Jr. Lifeguard Program. It enrolls nearly 1,100 Jr. Guards every summer, cheating an ongoing base of · educated, fit, and ocean-smart children, teens, and young adults. The program also helps the current active professional lifeguards with on-the- job refresher training in safety and fitness. There are many cases of Jr. Guards actually saving lives. In fact, last surnmer a young Jr. Guard, on a routine training swim, observed a 5 year old swimmer in distress and rescued him. San Diego is an ocean-based city. We must keep this valuable program, including the Drowning Prevention Outreach programs alive.

REMOTE ADDR: 198.180.31.12 000176 Original Message From: [email protected] [mailto:[email protected]] Sent: Friday, November 14, 2008 10:20 AM To; CLK- City Clerk Subject: City Council Meeting Agenda Comment Form

San Diego City Council Meeting Agenda Comment Form Submitted on Friday, November 14, 2008 at 10:20:04

Name: Timber Prehoda

Email: [email protected]

Address: 1982 Cable st.

City: San Diego

State: CA

Zip: 92107

Area Code: 63 6

Telephone: 359-6332

Source: San Diego City Council Meeting Agenda Comment Form at http://www.sandiego.gov/city-clerk/officialdocs/docketcomment.shtml

Agenda Item: 11/12/08 #1

Comments: I was raised i n O.B. from the time I was a toddler andI am now 37. The OB library has been there for all my school needs, references, and just a quiet place to read. I now take my children there. It is a friendly library with kind people who aire always ready to help. This community needs it's library. Think about the kids and students. If you close this branch, it makes it so difficult for anyone do to the travel needed to get to the nearest one. This would be turning your back onthis community who is just as deserving as any other community. We love this library, please reconsider.

REMOTE_ADDR: 198.180.31.12 HTTP_USER_AGENT: Mozilla/4.0 (compatible; MSIE 6.0; Windows NT 5.1; SVl; .NET CLR 1.1.4322) 000177 Original Message From: [email protected] [mailto:[email protected]] Sent: Saturday, November 15, 2008 10:11 AM To: CLK City Clerk Subject; City Council Meeting Agenda Comment Form

San Diego City Council Meeting Agenda Comment Form Submitted on Saturday, November 15, 2008 at 10:11:13

Name: Stephanie Wells

Email: [email protected]

Address: 14146 Via Alisal

City: San diego

State: CA

Zip: 92128

Area Code: 858

Telephone: 592-9071

.Source: San Diego City Council Meeting Agenda Comment Form at http://www.sandiego.gov/city-clerk/officialdocs/docketcomment.shtml

Agenda Item: Carmel Mtn Ranch Possible Library Closure 11/19/08

Comments: Please do not close our local library,. We are a homeschooling family and use the library on a multi-weekly basis. Also, with our economy I have noticed lots more children using our library. I would imagine that would be a shelter for them to keep from doing other things that could possibly get them into trouble. Our library is a huge asset to our community and to us personally a resource we cannot live without. thank you.

REMOTE_ADDR: 198.180.31.12 HTTP„USER_AGENT: Mozilla/4.0 (compatible; MSIE 7.0; Windows NT 5.1; .NET CLR 1.0.3705; .NET CLR 1.1.4322; Media Center PC 4.0; . NET CLR 2.0.50727) ^—-'-Ofciginal. Message- From: nsuserid©ada.sannet.gov [mailto:nsuserid©ada.sannet.gov] Sent: Saturday, November 15, 2008 6:08 P M To: CLK City Clerk Subject: City Council Meeting Agenda Comment Form

San Diego City Council Meeting Agenda Comment Form Submitted on Saturday, November 15, 2008 at 18:08:16

Name: Louis L Pechi

Address: 2400 Fifth Ave. Unit #101

City: San Diego

State: CA

Zip: 92101

Area Code: 619

Telephone; 237-1214

Source: San Diego City Council Meeting Agenda Comment Form at http://www.sandiego.gov/city-clerk/officialdocs/docketcomment.shtml

Agenda Item: Council meeting. November 19th, 2008

Comments: Please keep our libraries open. Next to book burning, shuttering libraries is the"one of the greatest sins

REMOTE_ADDR: 198 .180.31.12 HTTP_USER_AGENT: Mozilla/4.0 {compatible; MSIE 7.0; Windows NT 5.1; YPC 3.2.0; InfoPath.l; .NET CLR 3.6.04506.30; .NET CLR 2.0.50727; . NET CLR 3.0.04506.648; .NET CLR 3.5.21022) 000179 Original Message From: nsuserid©ada.sannet.gov [mailto:nsuserid©ada.sannet.gov] Sent: Saturday, November 15, 2008 7:21 PM To: CLK City Clerk Subject: City Council Meeting Agenda Comment Form

San Diego City Council Meeting Agenda Comment Form Submitted on Saturday, November 15, 2008 at 19:20:31

Name: Tom Griswold

Address: 1781 Bacon St

City: San Diego

State: CA

Zip: 92107

Area Code: 619

Telephone: 224-4512

Source: San Diego City Council Meeting Agenda Comment Form at http://www.sandiego.gov/city-clerk/officialdocs/dockeccommenc.shtml

Agenda Item: 11/19/08 Budget cuts/Libraries

Comments: Regarding the plans for library closures, please keep in mind that for many elderly people, people with lower incomes and those without cars, the library is their sole source of books, periodicals, and computer access. Closing any branches will cut their only means to information and knowledge. Please put yourself in their place. There had to be a time in your life when libraries were essential to your learning. Surely the City can cut hours at some branches to save the seven on the chopping block.

Respectfully,

Tom Griswold Ocean Beach

REMOTE_ADDR: 198.180.31.12 HTTP_USER_AGENT: Mozilla/4.0 (compatible; MSIE 7.0; Windows NT 5.1; .NET CLR 1.1.4322) 000180 Original Message From: [email protected] [mailto:[email protected]] Sent; Wednesday, November 19, 2008 10:34 AM To: CLK City Clerk Subject: City Council Meeting Agenda Comment Form

San Diego City Council Meeting Agenda Comment Form Submitted on Wednesday, November 19, 2008 at 10:33:51

Name: Rich Kacmar

Email: [email protected]

Address: 4084 45th St.

City: San Diego

State: CA

Zip: 92105

Source: San Diego City Council Meeting Agenda Comment Form at http://www.sandiego.gov/city-crerk/officialdocs/docketcomment.shtml

Agenda Item: Iteiu-l Nov. 19, 2003

Comments: No more cuts to Libraries and Park & Rec.

These departments have been hit hard enough already overthe years. The mayor's budget adjustment proposals are draconian and are being rushed through. A "strong mayor" does not mean an autocrat. Cutsof this magnitude and scope need to have reasoned public attention and input, and must reflect the fact this a long term (even if "temporary"!) situation. What additional cuts are to be expected? What are the costs of shuttered buildings?

REMOTE_ADDR: 198.180.31.12 HTTP_USER_AGENT: Mozilla/S.O (Windows; U; Windows NT 5.1; en-US; rv;l.9.0.4} Gecko/2008102920 Firefox/3.0.4