Call to action by City and School on Highway 156 - Take on Caltrans

Immediate Release

Jan McClintock, City of San Juan Bautista, 831-623-4661 ext 14

Ladies and Gentlemen;

On May 6, at the Board of Supervisor’s Meeting there was a public hearing on Highway 156 expansion. The City of San Juan Bautista and the San Juan School were dealt a terrible blow by 3 of the 4 supervisor’s present expressing their opinion that the "safe" option was needed for the 156. Per Caltrans, the only safe option is to have access roads, therefore it became apparent that these 3 supervisors are supporting a total of 6 lanes of highway across the San Juan Valley, a four lane raised highway with a 2 lane access road on one side.

Previously, the San Juan Bautista City Council had reached a compromise with the San Benito County Board of Supervisors and the San Benito County Council of Governments for a minimal footprint, an at-grade 4 lane expansion of Highway 156. This vote by the Board of Supervisors invalidated that compromise. The San Juan Bautista City Council is now calling for improvements on Highway 156 to be limited to safety improvements to the existing 2 lane and the removal of through truck traffic. The truck traffic should be sent down 152 or 25 until a new limited acccess 152 can be built along with a new interchange at Highway 25 and 101. The City Council passed a Resolution stating the reasons for this action which can be found at http://www.san-juan-bautista.ca.us/cityClerk.htm under 2008 resolutions.

Why is this a problem?

Instead of looking for a solution to the total traffic problems in San Benito County and working to get the trucks away from San Juan Bautista, leaving 156 as the scenic route through San Benito County (this option might not even need extensive changes once the trucks are gone), the majority of the San Benito County Board of Supervisor’s are throwing their hands in frustration saying they can’t move the highway 25 project forward so they will widen 156. San Benito County has traffic problems generated by Caltrans District 4 (Santa Clara County) as well as those of Caltrans District 5. The different Caltrans offices are not working together for a unified solution but rather working separately on their own projects. This is short-term thinking. It is not the best and most efficient use of public monies.

Additionally:

This hurts our children at the San Juan school. The school has been present in its current location for years. Caltrans did nothing to mitigate the diesel and noise pollution for our children when they widened 156 in 1995 because Caltrans didn’t recognize it as a problem. With the increasing truck traffic, it is a BIG problem. Caltrans will not address the issue with the new project because the school is technically not in the project area – yet the highway is being widened to accommodate more traffic which will cause more noise and pollution at the school.

Additionally, Caltrans took it upon themselves to remove one of the two pedestrian cross walks and lights that cross 156 when one had a malfunction. All of our school children who live across 156 must now go 1 block away from 156 to cross Alameda safely, then walk back towards 156. At this point they must now cross 4th street and walk to the highway. They cross the highway and depending on which side of the road they live on, they may or may not have to cross Alameda again on the south side of 156. Before the removal of one of the 156 cross walks, children could cross the highway on the side of the road where they lived. Only the children living on the west side of Alameda needed to back-track and cross the Alameda safely on the North side of the highway.

Rich Krumholz and Rich Rosales of District 5 Caltrans have gone on record to say they will not build a pedestrian overpass at the Alameda and they will not restore 2 cross walks over 156. We believe our children should be a priority, even if Caltrans does not.

It hurts the sound sleep and relaxation of everyone in town. The noise is abominable, especially at night when truckers use their engine breaks as they attempt, and often fail, to stop at the light at 156 and The Alameda. Caltrans promised to look at noise mitigation and to begin with a noise study. The City paid for a noise engineer to identify locations for the noise study. Caltrans now refuses to do the study. The City passed a noise engine brake Ordinance. To enforce the Ordinance we must have it posted. Caltrans District 5 refuses to allow us to post the Ordinance because Caltrans believes that to do so could open them to lawsuits from the Trucking industry.

It threatens the tourist based economy of the town. One of the largest attractions in town is the Mission San Juan Bautista. One of the things that makes it so unique and a tourist draw is that it is still surrounded by rural, agricultural lands. The taking of Prime Agricultural land by paving a 330 foot wide path through the San Juan Valley, some of the richest farmland in the United States, threatens that environment and therefore the economy of the town. We have worked hard to revitalize the economy of San Juan Bautista in a manner that doesn’t damage the assets that define the town’s character and flavor. We earned Preserve America status and we were awarded a 2008 Distinctive Destination by the National Trust for Historic Preservation. These two awards, coming less than a year apart, have earned San Juan Bautista and San Benito County international press. We are working with the National Parks Service to make SJB their gateway to the Pinnacles as well as a visitor's center for the Anza National Historic Trail (we will have NPS employees in town this summer). Our historic district is being nominated for the National Historic Registry. What development that we are considering in the City is being carefully planned to mesh into the rural environment and to augment the national historic asset that is San Juan Bautista. What Caltrans is doing will not augment, but rather damage that asset.

Caltrans is working to destroy what is a National Treasure and one of the last examples of old California for the world to visit.

It threatens the drainage of the Valley. The Caltrans plans will build a road that is effectively a large dike across the San Juan Valley. Caltrans has not maintained the drainage ditches in San Juan Bautista today nor the San Juan Creek. We called 8 times in 2007 in an effort to get the drain cleared at The Windmill Market. Caltrans waited so long to work on San Juan Creek that they can not clear it now due to Fish and Game regulations. Had it been maintained properly, this would not have occurred. These two items contribute significantly to flooding problems in San Juan Bautista and we believe are directly reflective of Caltrans management capabilities. If they have been unable to maintain these two small areas, how can we trust that they can maintain additional drainage areas?

Caltrans has already boggled one construction project in town. In 1995 when Caltrans widened the current 4 lane portion of 156 they were provided with detailed schematics from the City Water Engineer on how to encase the City’s water supply line from our Reservoir. This was critical as it was the only line from the reservoir into town. Caltrans did not encase the line properly. Then Caltrans added thousands of trucks (and their associated tonnage) per year by making 156 the preferred routing for all permit loads through the Pacheco Pass over our improperly protected water line. (We have done unscientific counts during summer months and depending on the day and time of day 20 - 25% of the traffic on 156 is long-haul trucking.) The water line under the highway broke, leaving the City without access to the reservoir and with no fire fighting capabilities. We applied a quick temporary patch. We have attempted to work with Caltrans to get the line rebuilt. Caltrans says they have no records on the water line existing. Our water engineer provided them with copies of the documentation. Their response is we have to take them to court. Their mistake and we have to pay legal fees for redress. Again, an inefficient use of public funds.

It’s a matter of trust. If we can not trust Caltrans to keep their word and perform their functions on small items like keeping their word on a noise study or keeping existing drainage lines clear, how can we trust them on large issues.

We urgently need your help. Write letters to the local and statewide newspapers. It is important for Sacramento and others to our concerns about SJB.

For more information contact:

Supervisor Anthony Botelho, San Benito County, bpfruit@garlic.com, 831-636-4000

Mayor George Dias, City of San Juan Bautista, dias323@hotmail.com, 831-623-4661

Where do our sales taxes go?

Our current sales tax rate is 8% - so who gets that money because it doesn't all go to the city?

4.75% goes to the state (General Fund)

0.25% goes to the State (Fiscal Recovery Fund)

0.50% goes to the State (Local Revenue Fund)

0.25% goes to the State (General Fund)

0.50% goes to the State State (Local Public Safety Fund)

1.00% goes to Local (County/City) of which 0.25% goes to County transportation funds and 0.75% goes to City and county operations

.75% goes to the City of San Juan Bautista

Total Sales Tax - 8%

Source: http://www.boe.ca.gov/news/sp111500att.htm

San Juan Bautista's Economy

So how did San Juan Bautista get into the economic position where we are today. Well, as with everything else in San Juan - it's a LONG story. Please note that if I've misstated any of the history, let me know and I'll correct this posting.

I'll save you from re-hearing the issues surrounding the railroad in going to Hollister rather than San Juan Bautista in the 19th Century and bring you into the 20th Century. Just keep in mind that before that occurrence, San Juan Bautista was a bustling, vibrant city. Having once been the headquarters for the Mexican government and the commercial hub for Northern California. San Juan Bautista remained the center of activity for this part of California for most of 19th Century.

After the railroad bypassed San Juan Bautista, the population began a steep decline. Then the Ideal Cement Plant was opened at the base of San Juan Canyon in the early 1900's and became the major employer in San Juan Bautista . I've heard varying estimates of it's maximum employment which range from 400 to 3000. Even if it was only 400, the plant alone provided "head of household" jobs which would have supported, assuming a low for that time of 4 per household, 1600 people. The cement factory closed in the mid to late 1970's. No effort was made by the City or the County to create a Redevelopment Zone. There has also been no enterprise zone created. Today, the rules to create either of these economic development tools are too costly for the City to afford. To date, there has been no replacement industrial development for the cement plant, the jobs are simply gone and most people commute to Silicon Valley or the Monterey Penisula to work.

Highway 101 used to go right through town. This provided the merchants in town with exposure to many tourists. When Highway 101 was diverted 2 miles north and west of town, the City lost visibility. Even today Caltrans refuses to place signs for San Juan Bautista and Fremont Peak State Parks on both directions of the 101 and 156 exits, even those they are very close to the 156 exit on 101. The Chamber paid for a billboard for a while, but they no longer pay for this and no other destination marketing plan has been put together by either the Chamber or the City. Since the majority of the residents of the affluent areas of Silicon Valley and the Central Valley came to California as adults, they do not remember driving through San Juan Bautista as children nor did they visit the mission as children. They simply do not know that San Juan Bautista exists. This is known as a loss of "mind share" and can only be remedied through marketing.

A similar thing happened, albeit to a lesser degree, when 156 was diverted to the south of town. Since people no longer drive through town but around town, they are less tempted to stop and spend time at town in the restaurants and in the stores.

Many towns choose to grow towards the highways when existing highways bypass their town. San Juan Bautista chose not to do this but rather preferred to try and keep the flavor of the hsitoric town. Since tourism is now the primary industry in town today, this loss of visibility has had significant impacts on the viability of businesses in town.

For a while the Chamber held some very large events. However, over time these events have lost their ability to attract large numbers of attendees and vendors. This is due to a combination of things but one major issue is the number of similar events throughout the region which often occur on the same or adjacent weekends. There is currently an attempt to make unique events in San Juan Bautista that will once again become large draws bringing many people to town, but new events take time to mature and become popular so this is not a quick fix.

City Hall has worked on this issue by using as many free opportunities as possible. The City was recently award the title of Preserve America and 2008 Distinctive Destinations by the National Trust for Historic Preservation. Both of these titles bring some level of national and international publicity.

One last thing that has impacted the City is the loss of prime real estate to non-taxable purposes. While these purposes are critical to the well-being of the community, they do not provide replacement revenue for the revenue that is lost. The City currently has over 20% of it’s property in non-taxable status. This is land that is part of the State Historic Park, the Mission, San Juan School and the cemetery district. This is a very large percentage of non-taxable property, particular for a small city. The State Historic Park took out restaurants, office space and hotels when they came to town, in their place they have a small gift shop. They do bring a lot of 4th graders to town, but they spend little money in town and ice cream cones are not subject to sales tax. The school lands were formerly agricultural so while they did not provide much revenue to the City from property taxes, because of their location they provided a significant opportunity for future revenue had they remained taxable. It is unusual for a City to allow a corner of prime commercial real estate to be converted into non-taxable use. However, at the time the decision was made to place the school in it's current location, Highway 156 was not the road it is today.

So, San Juan Bautista finds itself with a budget problem. Revenues do not equal the costs of the services that the residents want. If we want the services, we have to find some way to pay for those services. The monthly financial statements are posted on this website under the city treasurer. The City has opened its books going so far as to post the monthly check register. No other entity in San Benito County provides this level of fiscal transparency. We urge you to support the Sales Tax increase on the June, 2008 ballot.

Some charts of interest

Here are some charts to help you understand why the City needs to look for other sources of revenue. These charts illustrate how property taxes have not been able to keep pace with inflation and therefore the City's revenues from property taxes are not sufficient to pay bills.

Some details about City finances

Sales Tax: Public Finance: How things Work:

The City operates 3 businesses:

Water Enterprise
Sewer Enterprise
General Fund

By law, these must be self-supporting – no cross subsidies allowed. You’ve all endured the recent rate increases to make the Water and Sewer businesses self-supporting – and that has been successful. We must now work on making the General Fund successful.

General fund is primarily supported by:

Property Taxes
Sales Taxes
Fees and Licenses (business licenses, permits, etc.)
Grant funds (remember these may only be used for the purposes the voters or legislature sets for grants (ex. Community Center remodel was a State Wide proposition that had to be used for parks)

The General fund pays for:

Police
Fire
Library
Parks
Recreation
Roads
Sidewalks
Code enforcement
Utility assistance for elderly
General Planning Services
General Building Services
General City Services
General Citizen Assistance
Support for special events

What has the City already done already and what is proposed:

First the City Council made major cuts to the General Fund. Some of these actions included:

Cut Public Works from 4 people to 2 people and contracted for those people
Cut library from 63 to 28 hours per week
Cut City Hall staff from 4 ½ to 3 and cut public hours at City Hall
Cut Building Inspectors to by appointment only
Cut Planner to 1 day a week unless by appointment and billable
Cut Code enforcement by 50%
Cut all non-essential expenditures, no replacement of equipment unless emergency
Eliminate the paid Fire Chief positionEliminate 1 paid deputy

City Council looked for a way to increase funding which would have the least impact on the City residents Property taxes hurt the residents Fees only represent a minor contribution to the budget and this would impact residents and businesses Sales taxes are paid mostly by visitors. Sales Taxes are paid by residents primarily through the restaurants as most food purchased is not subject to sales taxes.

City Council chose to try for a ½ percent increase on the sales taxes which was expected to generate approximately $125,000/year.

Open letter to San Juan Bautista Residents

April 17, 2008

To: City of San Juan Bautista Registered Voters

Dear Voter:

The City Council has worked hard over the past 18 months to balance the City’s budget. As part of that process, City Hall hours have been cut to only 4 hours daily, City staff has been cut in half, the library hours have been reduced to only 28 hours per week, the Sheriff’s presence in town has been reduced, along with many, many other things. But costs keep going up for basic items like electricity and asphalt and the City is not getting more money in revenue. This is partially caused by the State of California using monies that are supposed to go to cities to balance the State’s budget.

The City of San Juan Bautista receives less and less of it’s money from property taxes because Prop 13 limits increases in property taxes and because not very many homes in San Juan Bautista sell each year. This means that most, over 70%, of the homes in San Juan Bautista are paying property taxes at a very low rate, based on their 1979 values. This is good for the property owner, but doesn’t allow the City’s budget to keep pace with inflation. In addition to that, the weak economy combined with the loss of several businesses in town further reduces the City’s revenues from sales taxes.

Therefore, the City Council is reluctantly asking each of you to consider an increase in the Sales Tax. This will mostly impact out-of-town visitors since it will not apply to groceries. To make sure that new money is spent on critical items, the City Council has agreed to create an advisory board to make recommendations on how to use the new revenue from the Sales tax.

This packet invites you to a town hall meeting on April 30 at 7:00 at the Community Center (1st and San Jose) to talk with the City Council about the proposed Sales Tax increase. We urge you to come and have your questions answered.

Sincerely,

Janice L. McClintock

Mission is Life Festival

The Mission is Life Festival has been postponed. As most folks know, events involving the Olympics and the Chinese government right now are generating protests. Therefore, the organizer of the event and the host cities decided that it was in the best interests of public safety to postpone the event until after the Olympics.

Stay tuned and we'll let you know when the new dates will be!