Q: What is the single biggest opportunity for San Luis Obispo in the next two years, and if elected what would you do to ensure that it is acted upon?
Daniel Cano – The biggest opportunity is the City Council’s ability to have a positive impact on real estate development projects in the pipeline. If elected, I would work to ensure that the scope of development meets the needs of San Luis Obispo now and 20 years into the future by integrating open space requirements, energy efficiency and affordable workforce housing.
Carlyn Christianson – Taking this time of high economic performance to further invest in our future is our biggest opportunity as a city. Using the public budget process for 2015-2017 to implement key initiatives will bring our city into the 21st century and set the stage for years to come. Whether we tackle climate change, housing, neighborhood issues, water, transportation, infrastructure financing, open space maintenance or another of the many challenges and opportunities we face, doing it as part of the budget process will ensure that we can accomplish our goals.
Michael Clark – We have an opportunity to get a handle on the City’s financial situation once we learn CalPERS’ determination of our unfunded liabilities. I will be diligent in addressing that potential threat to our city’s financial well-being.
Don Hedrick – With the country being pulled into financial collapse by the international corporate criminal elite, the city government has the chance to lead the nation back to respecting the Constitution and restoring the rights of the people that have been so recklessly trampled by the seditious traitors that have infested all levels of our governments. We need to first restore the people’s confidence in the voting process. I would press for the return to people counting the ballots instead of handing our ballots over to organized crime built, programed, operated electronic vote stealing machines.
Jan Marx – Implementing the Land Use and Circulation Element Update, including planning for workforce and affordable housing in the annexation areas such as San Luis Ranch, Avila Ranch and the Margarita Area. I will vote to overrule the Airport Land Use Commission, if it will not accommodate the City’s plans to expand residential areas.
Gordon Mullin – We have the opportunity to start to fix two long standing problems- workforce housing and rebalance of our neighborhoods. By engaging collaboratively with Cal Poly, SLO City Council should mitigate the impact on our neighborhoods of having an excessive number of students living in SLO as opposed to living on campus. To the degree that we move students onto campus, that will diminish the demand on our rentals and allow these to become, once again, housing used by our local workforce.
Dan Rivoire – Our biggest opportunity in the next two years is to capitalize on the improved ability to empower local companies to succeed, draw talented employees to the region and attract new economic development while retaining our incredible quality of life.
In order to succeed in seizing this valuable opportunity I will lead the City’s effort to:
1. Focus revenue on protecting neighborhood safety and health, building necessary transportation improvements, and maintaining current infrastructure.
2. Preserve fiscal health by managing debt and expenses while increasing future revenue.
3. Engage more citizens in the civic process and increase participation to better represent City demographics.
Jeffrey Specht – Making our current charter coincide with the United States Constitution. In doing so, we could help the homeless situation to improve, instead of covering it up and forcing the homeless into other cities, as well as prevent further homelessness of veterans and the mentally ill.
Q: What do you believe is the biggest barrier that businesses face in San Luis Obispo, and what can the City do to addresses these issues?
Carlyn Christianson – Housing and transportation options for employees. People live and work here to enjoy a high quality of life, and that means no long commutes—and caring about environmental concerns like air quality and carbon emissions. SLO must implement its General Plan policies that call for more housing that is affordable-by-design, and multi-modal transportation improvements such as improved public transit along with more supportive infrastructure such as bike paths and connections.
Michael Clark – The biggest barriers that businesses face are no different here than anywhere else in California, and they are the economic and regulatory uncertainties caused by decisions made in Sacramento and Washington. I don’t believe the City has any influence over those. However, with the recent proposal to ban polystyrene food containers, the City plays a major role in potentially raising operating costs for many small businesses. The Chamber is ideally situated to compile data on polystyrene use across all businesses within the city, not simply food service, make informed recommendations on the economics of the ban and practicality of polystyrene replacement, and identify alternatives for specific uses.
Don Hedrick – The process of navigating the regulations and fees in the process of starting a business that are not so equally administered increased the strain on their resources and confounds their planning. If those fees were more reasonable and perhaps not due in total up front but could partially deferred till their businesses had some inflow of funds perhaps they would more easily accelerate success.
Jan Marx – The biggest barrier to business is economic uncertainty, including uncertainty about obtaining loans. The City can address these issues by entering into development agreements where appropriate and streamlining its procedures, without short cutting the public hearing process.
Gordon Mullin – An EVC report identified as one of the major barriers to business growth the lack of workforce housing. How to fix? See above for a partial answer.
Dan Rivoire – Business owners consistently state that access to high speed internet and availability of office space and workforce housing are top barriers.
The City needs to continue efforts to improve broadband infrastructure and approve development projects that simultaneously protect neighborhoods, respect growth limits, and address traffic impacts.
Jeffrey Specht – Ridiculous rents and licensing requirements. We could stop making it so hard for the property owners to rent the properties, and therefore forwarding that cost to lessees.
Daniel Cano – The biggest barriers to businesses in San Luis Obispo will always be the local economy. The City must be proactive by ensuring that there is the proper mix of facilities and services to attract tourist, local, and business consumers. The City must also ensure that infrastructure is in place to support a growing economy like public parking and transportation.
Q: Do you believe the City of San Luis Obispo has gone far enough with recent fiscal oversight in reigning in costs, or do you believe more progress can be made? How would you accomplish this?
Michael Clark – The City has made a start at reigning in costs, but it will take a Council focused on spending as carefully as most of us do in our private lives. Perhaps it is time to step away from nice-to-haves and focus on must-haves.
Don Hedrick – Fiscal oversight can only see what it is shown. Shifting tasks over to outside paid consultants to perform tasks could be a way to conserve staff time but makes for heaver spending to more and more outside vendors of those consulting services. We should be giving preference to local talent. The upper tier of city staff are blessed with questionable raises while all the rest of the city workers are asked to accept pay cuts. Where is the justice in that?
Jan Marx – The City should always have an eagle eye for cost cutting measures. So yes, more progress can be made. I would ask departments to engage in fiscal self- examination and propose cost cutting measures. I also would also establish a sub-fund to address unpredictable liability pension costs.
Gordon Mullin – No, it hasn’t. This council must change its mindset from the expediency of easy spending of other people’s money to an attitude best personified as- “unless it brings measurable benefit to our citizens, don’t spend that tax dollar.”
Dan Rivoire – The City made major strides toward providing sufficient oversight and reigning in costs through pension reform, establishing the financial oversight committee and providing easy access to figures displaying the City’s expenses, revenues and financial status. We are on the right track.
Nevertheless, I recognize the need to address unfunded liability and will focus on the components of our debt that accrue interest. Balancing those needs with the desire to complete projects and deliver services that residents demand is my top budget priority.
Jeffrey Specht – Obviously more progress can be made. First, we need to assume a city-wide fiduciary responsibility. I would rehabilitate CalPERS and invest the monies that are already in our investment fund rather than leave 80 percent liquid, to assure employee benefits are covered.
Daniel Cano – I believe the City has done a lot to reign-in spending during the last few years. However, I would focus on improving efficiencies while developing capacity to support growth in the next 10 years. Given the large scale development projects now in the pipeline, we need an effective city staff with the capacity and resources to ensure quality service.
Carlyn Christianson – SLO made great strides in reducing costs during the recession. City departments are undergoing comprehensive operational reviews resulting in lower costs. SLO can always do more; it just takes informed attention to the details. But—it’s also important that SLO spends the resources needed to provide the level of services desired, so wholesale or arbitrary attacks on spending aren’t useful. Sticking to sustainable budget goals within revenue realities is the key.
Q: Measure Y, the ½ percent sales tax in place since 2007, has been an important source of funds for maintaining the quality of life in San Luis Obispo. The measure will sunset in 2015. Are you in support of its renewal, now known as “Measure G” which will be on the November ballot? Why or why not?
Don Hedrick – Measure Y is the City’s drug of choice to justify more tax and spend. Unfortunately not all the spending is confined to the original intent of the measure. It was good to have it sunset but we should have some nighttime for us to assess the results before rushing into the dawn of a reincarnated tax. We need to sequester that kind of tax away from the general fund to keep a better watch on its uses.
Jan Marx – Yes, I support Measure G. This renewal of Measure Y’s additional sales tax revenue will do a lot to maintain and enhance our local quality of life, stabilize our finances during difficult times, preserve essential services, improve infrastructure and expand open space, just as it has in the past eight years. The money spent in San Luis Obispo from this additional sales tax revenue will stay in our city. About 72 percent of the sales-tax revenue is paid by visitors, not by residents. Non-residents cause wear and tear on our infrastructure and benefit from the excellent services the city provides, and this sales tax increment enables them to pay their own way. It generates about $6.5 million a year, which is around 12 percent of the City’s operating budget. Loss of this revenue would halt the community’s present upward economic trajectory. I agree with residents who say that to not pass Measure G would be a grave mistake, the proverbial “shooting ourselves in the foot.”
Gordon Mullin – The ‘sale’ of Measure Y (now G) has been disingenuous on several levels. This council continues to misrepresent the basics of government financing by asking the citizens of SLO to believe that a tax dollar which comes from a single source, e.g. Measure Y, and then flows into a general operating fund which receives taxes from multiple sources can then be allocated to a specific expenditure. It can’t. Conversely, one cannot point to a specific project or expense and claim that it was paid for by funds from a single funding source. That’s not true either.
That said, the foundational issue today is- will this council spend the tax dollars entrusted to it efficiently and in the best interest of the citizens of SLO?
I will vote yes for Measure G for if I am elected to council I will work to insure prudent use of each tax dollar received and spent.
Dan Rivoire – I support Measure G and believe revenues should be devoted to accomplishing major city goals.
The half-percent sales tax generates 12 percent ($6.5 million) of the City’s general fund revenue each year and 72 percent ($4.7 million) of that is paid by visitors. Measure G effectively ensures that visitors contribute to covering costs associated with their impact while empowering the City preserve open space, provide senior services, and complete capital improvement projects
Jeffrey Specht – No. In the past all of the funds went into the general fund account and later aided employee retirement benefits. In short there is no accountability. We need to start again with a completely new measure that will earmark money specifically for the purposes intended.
Daniel Cano – I support Measure G and I believe the tax has funded projects that have allowed San Luis Obispo to expand capital improvement projects at a time when our struggling economy would have otherwise forced the City to place them on hold. Moving forward, I believe the tax will be an important resource to continue capital improvement expansion which will be necessary as current development project add to population growth.
Carlyn Christianson – I support Measure G because in 2006 the residents voted a funding source to pay for their high expectations regarding the level of services they wanted in our city, and the voters should have the opportunity once more. The money was well spent; the benefits are measureable. Measure Y proved invaluable in the recession and allowed the City to weather it much better than much of the region and the nation.
Michael Clark – While I supported Measure Y, I do not believe the funds were spent as most voters believed they would be. The ballot measure called for Measure Y to be “for eight years only” and should sunset as planned. Measure G, as written, is a general purpose tax available for any use and contains most of the same verbiage as the Measure Y tax. Had the newly proposed Measure G been presented as a specific tax, depending on the specific purposes identified, I probably could have supported it and may well do so if given the opportunity in the future. But not this year.