SOI & MSR Napa County Regional Park and Open Space District 2019

LOCAL AGENCY FORMATION COMMISSION OF NAPA COUNTY Political Subdivision of the State of California We Manage Government Boundaries, Evaluate Municipal Services, and Protect Agriculture NAPA COUNTY REGIONAL PARK AND OPEN SPACE DISTRICT MUNICIPAL SERVICE REVIEW AND SPHERE OF INFLUENCE UPDATE Prepared in accordance with Government Code Sections 56425 and 56430 Final Report August 2019 Commissioners Staff /Administrative Office Gregory Rodeno Chair, Public Member Brendon Freeman Executive Officer Kenneth Leary Vice Chair, City Member Dawn Mittleman Longoria Analyst II Kathy Mabry Commission Secretary Diane Dillon Commissioner, County Member DeeAnne Gillick Commission Counsel Margie Mohler Commissioner, City Member Brad Wagenknecht Commissioner, County Member Napa LAFCO Office Ryan Gregory Alternate Commissioner, County Member 1030 Seminary Street, Suite B Scott Sedgley Alternate Commissioner, City Member Napa, California 94559 Vacant Alternate Commissioner, Public Member www.napa.lafco.ca.gov This page has been left intentionally blank. FINAL Napa County Regional Park and Open Space District Municipal Service Review and Sphere of Influence Update 2019 ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS ................................................................................................................................................................ 1 CONTENTS I. INTRODUCTION ................................................................................................................................................................... 2 A. LOCAL AGENCY FORMATION COMMISSIONS ........................................................................................................................................... 2 B. MUNICIPAL SERVICE REVIEWS ............................................................................................................................................................. 2 C. SPHERE OF INFLUENCE UPDATES .......................................................................................................................................................... 2 D. NAPA COUNTY REGIONAL PARK AND OPEN SPACE DISTRICT ..................................................................................................................... 2 II. EXECUTIVE SUMMARY ........................................................................................................................................................ 4 A. MUNICIPAL SERVICE REVIEW .............................................................................................................................................................. 4 1. Growth and population projections for the affected area....................................................................................................... 4 2. The location and characteristics of any disadvantaged unincorporated communities within or contiguous to the sphere of influence. ..................................................................................................................................................................................... 5 3. Present and planned capacity of public facilities and adequacy of public services, including infrastructure needs or deficiencies. ................................................................................................................................................................................. 5 4. Financial ability of agencies to provide services. ..................................................................................................................... 5 5. Status and opportunities for shared facilities. ......................................................................................................................... 6 6. Accountability for community service needs, including governmental structure and operational efficiencies. ...................... 6 7. Relationship with regional growth goals and policies. ............................................................................................................ 7 B. SPHERE OF INFLUENCE UPDATE ........................................................................................................................................................... 7 1. Present and planned land uses in the area, including agricultural and open-space lands. ..................................................... 7 2. Present and probable need for public facilities and services in the area. ................................................................................ 7 3. Present capacity of public facilities and adequacy of public services that the agency provides or is authorized to provide. . 7 4. The existence of any social or economic communities of interest in the area if the commission determines that they are relevant to the agency. ................................................................................................................................................................ 7 III. AGENCY REVIEW ................................................................................................................................................................. 8 A. DISTRICT PROFILE ............................................................................................................................................................................. 8 B. OVERVIEW ...................................................................................................................................................................................... 9 C. FORMATION .................................................................................................................................................................................... 9 D. ADOPTED BOUNDARIES ................................................................................................................................................................... 10 E. POPULATION AND GROWTH .............................................................................................................................................................. 10 1. Population Trends .................................................................................................................................................................. 10 Resident Population Estimates .................................................................................................................................................................. 10 Future Resident Population Projections .................................................................................................................................................... 11 2. Growth Trends Relating to Public Parks and Open Space ..................................................................................................... 11 F. ORGANIZATIONAL STRUCTURE ........................................................................................................................................................... 12 1. Governance............................................................................................................................................................................ 12 2. Administration ....................................................................................................................................................................... 12 G. MUNICIPAL SERVICES ...................................................................................................................................................................... 12 1. Master Plan ........................................................................................................................................................................... 13 2. District Projects ...................................................................................................................................................................... 13 Oat Hill Mine Trail...................................................................................................................................................................................... 14 Napa River Ecological Reserve ................................................................................................................................................................... 14 Berryessa Vista Wilderness Park ................................................................................................................................................................ 14 Berryessa Peak Trail ................................................................................................................................................................................... 14 FINAL Napa County Regional Park and Open Space District Municipal Service Review and Sphere of Influence Update 2019 Camp Berryessa Park ................................................................................................................................................................................. 15 Bothe Napa Valley State Park and Bale Grist Mill State Historic Park ........................................................................................................ 15 Robert Louis Stevenson State Park (RLS) ................................................................................................................................................... 15 Moore Creek Park ...................................................................................................................................................................................... 15 Napa River and Bay Trail ............................................................................................................................................................................ 16 Mt. Veeder including Amy’s Grove and The Cove ...................................................................................................................................... 17 Suscol Headwaters Preserve ...................................................................................................................................................................... 17 Putah Creek Land Bank (Spanish Valley, Crystal Flats and Stone Corral) ................................................................................................... 18 Smittle Creek (Cedar Roughs) .................................................................................................................................................................... 18 3. Pending Services .................................................................................................................................................................... 19 Vine Trail .................................................................................................................................................................................................... 19 Berryessa Estates Park ............................................................................................................................................................................... 19 Skyline Park ................................................................................................................................................................................................ 19 Vallejo Lakes .............................................................................................................................................................................................. 19 H. FINANCIAL ..................................................................................................................................................................................... 20 1. Assets, Liabilities, and Net Position ....................................................................................................................................... 20 Assets ......................................................................................................................................................................................................... 21 Liabilities .................................................................................................................................................................................................... 21 Net Position ............................................................................................................................................................................................... 22 2. REVENUE AND EXPENSE TRENDS ........................................................................................................................................................ 23 3. Current Budget ...................................................................................................................................................................... 24 General Operations .................................................................................................................................................................................... 25 Moore Creek Park ...................................................................................................................................................................................... 25 Oat Hill Mine Trail ...................................................................................................................................................................................... 25 Napa River and Bay Trail ............................................................................................................................................................................ 25 Camp Berryessa Park ................................................................................................................................................................................. 25 Berryessa Vista Wilderness Park ................................................................................................................................................................ 26 Napa River Ecological Reserve ................................................................................................................................................................... 26 Vine Trail .................................................................................................................................................................................................... 26 Putah Creek Land Bank (Spanish Valley, Crystal Flats and Stone Corral) ................................................................................................... 26 State Parks ................................................................................................................................................................................................. 26 Suscol Headwaters ..................................................................................................................................................................................... 27 Amy’s Grove and The Cove ........................................................................................................................................................................ 27 Smittle Creek (Cedar Roughs) .................................................................................................................................................................... 27 IV. ENVIRONMENTAL REVIEW ............................................................................................................................................ 28 A. MUNICIPAL SERVICE REVIEW ............................................................................................................................................................ 28 B. SPHERE OF INFLUENCE UPDATE ......................................................................................................................................................... 28 V. SOURCES ............................................................................................................................................................................... 29 A. AGENCY CONTACTS ......................................................................................................................................................................... 29 B. DOCUMENTS.................................................................................................................................................................................. 29 C. WEBSITES...................................................................................................................................................................................... 30 D. APPENDIX ..................................................................................................................................................................................... 30 FINAL Napa County Regional Park and Open Space District Municipal Service Review and Sphere of Influence Update 2019 FIGURES Figure 1 District Map ....................................................................................................................................................... 3 Figure 2 Population........................................................................................................................................................ 10 Figure 3 ABAG Population Projections .......................................................................................................................... 11 Figure 4 Acreage per Population ................................................................................................................................... 11 Figure 5 Public Access Projects ...................................................................................................................................... 13 Figure 6 Trail Usage May 2016-August 2018 ................................................................................................................. 16 Figure 7 Planned Public Access ...................................................................................................................................... 17 Figure 8 Assets: Five-Year Chart .................................................................................................................................... 21 Figure 9 Liabilities: Five-Year Chart ............................................................................................................................... 21 Figure 10 Net Position: Five-Year Chart ......................................................................................................................... 22 Figure 11 Financial Statements 2017-18 ........................................................................................................................ 22 Figure 12 Revenues and Expenses: Five-Year Table ....................................................................................................... 23 Figure 13 Percentage County Funding: Five-Year .......................................................................................................... 24 Figure 14 Adopted Budget 2018-19 ............................................................................................................................... 24 FINAL Napa County Regional Park and Open Space District Municipal Service Review and Sphere of Influence Update 2019 ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS LAFCO of Napa County wishes to express appreciation to Napa County Regional Park and Open Space District General Manager, John Woodbury, and staff for their cooperation and for providing necessary information throughout this process. In addition, we want to give credit to the District for the beautiful pictures they provided for use in the report. Certainly, these pictures helped to visually tell the story of the agency’s purpose and accomplishments. Page | 1 FINAL Napa County Regional Park and Open Space District Municipal Service Review and Sphere of Influence Update 2019 I. INTRODUCTION ALo.c aLl oAcgeanlc yA Fgoermnactiyon F Coormmmiasstioinosn (L CAoFCmOms) airses ionlosca ted in all 58 counties in California and are delegated political subdivisions of the State of California and are regulatory and planning responsibilities to coordinate the responsible for administering a section of Government logical formation and development of local governmental Code known as the Cortese-Knox-Hertzberg Local agencies and their services while protecting agricultural Government Reorganization Act of 2000. LAFCOs are and open space resources. BAs. Mpaurtn icofi pathle SeCrovrteiscee-K Rnoexv-Hieertwzbser g Local Municipal service reviews vary in scope and can focus on Government Reorganization Act of 2000, LAFCOs are a particular agency, type of service, or geographic region. required to prepare municipal service reviews in Municipal service reviews may also lead LAFCO to take conjunction with updating each local agency’s sphere of other actions under its authority, such as initiating a influence (“sphere”) every five years, as necessary. The reorganization involving two or more special districts. All legislative intent of municipal service reviews is to inform municipal service reviews, however, must include written LAFCOs about the availability and sufficiency of statements making determinations pursuant to governmental services provided within their respective Government Code (G.C.) Section 56340. jurisdictions prior to making sphere determinations. CA . cSenptrhale prlean noinf gI nrefslpuonesnibicliety Ufopr dLaAFteCOs is the be consistent with the spheres of the affected local determination of a sphere for each city and special district agencies with limited exceptions. In making a sphere under its jurisdiction. LAFCO establishes, amends, and determination, LAFCO must prepare written statements updates spheres to designate the territory it believes pursuant to G.C. Section 56425. The intent in preparing represents the appropriate and probable future service the written statements is to capture the legislative intent area and jurisdictional boundary of the affected agency. of the sphere determination with regard to coordinating All jurisdictional changes, such as annexations and the sensible development of each local agency consistent detachments, as well as outside service extensions, must with the anticipated needs of the affected community. DTh.i sN raeppoart Creopurensetnyts RLeAFgCioOn oafl PNaaprak C aonundty ’Os peand dSrepssaincge th De ifascttorrisc rte q uired for both the municipal (“Commission”) scheduled municipal service review and service review and sphere of influence mandates. The sphere of influence update for the Napa County Regional second section provides a comprehensive review of Park and Open Space District (NCRPOSD). The report NCRPOSD in terms of its formation and development, is organized into two principal sections. The first section population and growth, organizational structure, is an executive summary that includes determinations municipal service provision, and financial standing. Page | 2 FINAL Napa County Regional Park and Open Space District Municipal Service Review and Sphere of Influence Update 2019 FIGURE 1 DISTRICT MAP Page | 3 FINAL Napa County Regional Park and Open Space District Municipal Service Review and Sphere of Influence Update 2019 II. EXECUTIVE SUMMARY The municipal service review indicates NCRPOSD has dependent on maintaining and expanding volunteer A. Municipal Service Review generally established adequate administrative, service, resources. An additional funding source will be necessary and financial capacities to provide an appropriate level of for the District to provide public access to important public park and open space services within Napa County. open space and for the District to protect fragile habitat These capacities appear sufficient to continue providing for future generations. effective services in the near term based on local needs and conditions. Importantly, the adequacy of these The following statements address the factors prescribed capacities is predicated on NCRPOSD’s ability to for consideration as part of the municipal service review maintain its current funding relationship with the County, process under G.C. Section 56430. These statements are which currently covers between one-half to two-thirds of based on information collected and analyzed in the District operating costs. NCRPOSD’s capacity to meet Agency Review section of this report. its increasing service commitments is also significantly 1N.C GRrPoOwSDt hh aas nexdp eprioenpcuedl aa t0i.5o%n apnrnouajle incctrieoanses i nf oitsr theP uabflfiec cpatrekd a nadr oepae.n space growth serves as a key service resident population over the last five years from an indicator for NCRPOSD as it relates to addressing estimated 138,038 to 141,294. It is reasonable to assume current and future demands given its statutorily-defined the rate of annual population growth will remain stable duties and powers. All five cities in Napa County own over the next 10 years consistent with projections issued and operate public parks and open space ranging from by the Association of Bay Area Governments, which intensive to passive uses within or adjacent to urban suggests NCRPOSD’s resident population will reach areas. Importantly, it is assumed NCRPOSD and the 148,600 by 2025 based on a 0.7% annual increase. cities have a shared customer base with regards to providing public park and open space services. Page | 4 FINAL Napa County Regional Park and Open Space District Municipal Service Review and Sphere of Influence Update 2019 Local public park and open space growth by the five cities over 5,090 acres of public park and open space lands. of Napa County has been relatively minimal as total Projects owned and protected by the District include acreage has increased by 11 acres in the last five years. Moore Creek Park, Spanish Valley Crystal Flats, Smittle This minimal growth is attributed to the downturn in the Creek, Amy’s Grove, The Cove and Berryessa Vista national economy and entirely limited to projects Wilderness Park. Projects the District manages and undertaken within the City of Napa. provides public access, but does not own, include Oat Hill Mine Trail, Lake Hennessey Unit of Moore Creek, NCRPOSD has made a measurable contribution in Bothe-Napa Valley State Park and Bale Grist Mill State increasing public park and open space growth in Napa Historic Park. County since its formation. In all, NCRPOSD has added 2. The location and characteristics of any disadvantaged unincorporated communities within or contiguous to the sphere of influence. No disadvantaged unincorporated communities have or contiguous to NCRPOSD’s sphere of influence. been identified within 3. Present and planned capacity of public facilities and adequacy of public services, including infrastructure needs or deficiencies. NCRPOSD’s current public facilities owned by the is largely dependent on volunteer resources given its District are two distinct properties totaling close to 900 present and planned organizational capacity. acres in size and under development as Berryessa Vista Wilderness Park and the Moore Creek Unit of Moore In addition to maintaining an adequate volunteer base, Creek Park. In addition, the District owns over 3,900 NCRPOSD’s ability to expand park and open space acres in land banks and preserves including Putah Creek services is dependent on program income and external Land Bank, Suscol Headwaters Preserve and Smittle revenue streams, namely grants, donations, and annual Creek (Cedar Roughs). NCRPOSD is also under contract contributions from the County of Napa. with other governmental agencies to manage Oat Hill Mine Trail, Napa River Ecological Reserve, the Napa NCRPOSD has established regular visitor counts. These River and Bay Tail, Bothe-Napa Valley State Park, Bale counts have established baseline information with regard Grist Mill State Historic Park, and the Lake Hennessey to the present demand for services while informing Unit of Moore Creek Park. (See the separate District NCRPOSD in allocating current and future resources Projects section of this report.) consistent with the preferences of constituents. (See Figure 6 for visitor counts.) The ability of NCRPOSD to adequately operate and maintain current and planned public facilities and services 4Th. eF icnurarennct iaabli laityb iolfi tNyC oRfP aOgSeDn ctoi emsa tinota pinr porvesiednet sertvaxi cbeasse.. Some operations (such as at Bothe Napa Valley and future operating services is entirely dependent on State Park and the Bale Grist Mill) are fully supported by program income, donations, grants, and discretionary program revenues, but others require discretionary grants funds provided by the County of Napa. This financial to operate and could close if the County were to cancel structure appears vulnerable because it has no dedicated its grant to the District of a portion of the County’s Page | 5 FINAL Napa County Regional Park and Open Space District Municipal Service Review and Sphere of Influence Update 2019 Transient Occupancy Tax (TOT). Without new operating expenses and demonstrates prudent financial dedicated funding, the District’s rate of making management. improvements to and opening for public use its existing land-banked properties will be slow. Management for NCRPOSD has proven adept at obtaining grant funding through various statewide and NCRPOSD’s current financial structure is unique for a local programs to finance several land acquisitions and special district given it relies on various forms of outside trail improvements totaling over $2.634 million in 2017- contributions to support capital and operational expenses 18. The ability to draw on outside funding helps rather than collecting taxes and assessment. economize NCRPOSD’s resources in providing cost effective public park and open space services. NCRPOSD has successfully increased its available fund balance over each of the last five fiscal years with the The absence of long-term debt coupled with positive balance currently totaling $1.546 million. Most of this operating margins advantageously positions NCRPOSD fund balance is restricted to particular purposes, but the to potentially raise new capital through bonded debt at remaining unrestricted fund balance provides favorable interest rates. NCRPOSD sufficient liquidity to cover budgeted 5. Status and opportunities for shared facilities. NCRPOSD’s services are largely oriented towards implementing projects of shared interest and benefit. In addressing recreational and open space policies codified the process of implementing policies the District works in the County General Plan. This orientation creates a in collaboration with a variety of non-profit groups, prescriptive working relationship in which NCRPOSD government agencies and regional organizations. works closely with the County in identifying and 6. Accountability for community service needs, including governmental structure and operational efficiencies. NCRPOSD is governed by a responsive and dedicated the District providing tangible services to meet the board and staff. These characteristics enhance preferences and demands of its constituents. accountability and cultivate positive working relationships with members of the public and other local NCRPOSD’s organizational structure as an independent agencies. special district is appropriate given the District’s legislative authority to provide public park and open NCRPOSD continues to solicit community input on the space services for the benefit of all citizens in Napa District’s activities, which demonstrates a concerted County, both in the unincorporated and incorporated effort to remain accountable. This and other outreach areas of the county. It should be noted, however, that as efforts help to ensure alignment between NCRPOSD’s a special district NCRPOSD is subject to the General current and future activities with the needs and Plan and Zoning policies of the County and the five preferences of constituents. municipalities, and the lack of a dedicated tax base means the District must be largely deferential to the There have been no complaints about NCRPOSD filed County of Napa. by Napa County residents or neighboring organizations. NCRPOSD’s current organizational capacity is largely supported by volunteers and highlights a premium on Page | 6 FINAL Napa County Regional Park and Open Space District Municipal Service Review and Sphere of Influence Update 2019 7. Relationship with regional growth goals and policies. NCRPOSD serves an integral role in developing and District works with a variety of State and Bay Area implementing recreational and open space policies agencies to achieve regional plans that include or effect codified in the County of Napa General Plan. The Napa County. BNo. Schpanhgeesr teo NoCf RIPnOflSuDe’s nspcheer eU opf idnfaluteenc e appear appropriate service boundary consistent with its available warranted. This affirmation confirms the current sphere and planned capacities. This determination is supported of influence designation demarks NCRPOSD’s by the following statements. 1. Present and planned land uses in the area, including agricultural and open-space Tlahne dpsre. sent and planned land uses within the current services support – directly and indirectly – agricultural sphere of influence are outlined in the general plans and open space policies that are prevalent within these prepared by the six overlapping land use authorities. The general plans. exercise of NCRPOSD’s public park and open space 2Vo. tPerrse asfefirnmte ad nthde irp sruopbpoarbt laen dn neeeedd ffoor rp pubulibc lpiacr kf acilNitoievesm abnerd 2s0e0r6.v iTchees p irnes etnhte a andr eparo. bable need for and open space services within the current sphere of these types of services is also codified as part of several influence in approving the formation of NCRPOSD in policy goals and objectives in the County General Plan. 3. Present capacity of public facilities and adequacy of public services that the agency provides or is authorized to provide. The Commission has confirmed through the municipal adequate and effective public park and open space service review process NCRPOSD has established services within the current sphere of influence. 4. The existence of any social or economic communities of interest in the area if the cTohem cmurriesnst isopnhe dree otef rinmfluienneces rtehflaectt st hsoecyia la triees relevant tboo utnhdea ray gwehnicchy .w ere memorialized by voters in existing between NCRPOSD and its jurisdictional November 2006. Page | 7 FINAL Napa County Regional Park and Open Space District Municipal Service Review and Sphere of Influence Update 2019 III. AGENCY REVIEW A. DDiissttrricitc Nt aPmreo: fil e Napa County Regional Park and Open Space District Type of District: Regional Park and Open Space District Principal Act: Public Resources Code Sections 5500 to 5595 Functions/Services: Operation and management of public parks and open space Main Office: County Administration Building, Second Floor Email: info@nrcposd.org Phone No. (707) 259-5933 Web Site: www.napaoutdoors.org District Manager: John Woodbury Governing Body: Five Member Board of Directors (registered-voter system) Meeting Schedule: Second Monday of every month at 2:00 p.m. Meeting Location: County of Napa Board of Supervisors Chambers 1195 Third Street, Third Floor Napa, CA 94559 Date of Formation: 2006 Principal County: Napa County District Boundary: 506,517 acres District Sphere: 506,517 acres 2018-19 Budget: $2,584,390 District Board Members: • Brent Randol Ward Three, President • Barry Christian Ward Five, Vice President • Karen Bower Turjanis Ward One • Tony Norris Ward Two • Dave Finigan Ward Four Page | 8 FINAL Napa County Regional Park and Open Space District Municipal Service Review and Sphere of Influence Update 2019 BNC. ROPvOeSDrv wiaes wfor med in 2006 and provides a range of regularly retained as needed to provide specialized municipal services relating to the operation of public services. NCRPOSD’s jurisdictional boundary includes parks and open space in Napa County. NCRPOSD is an all incorporated and unincorporated lands in Napa independent special district governed by five elected County and has an estimated resident service population members from the general public. Staffing services are of 141,294. The current budget is $2,584,390 with an provided by contract through other agencies, most unrestricted fund balance of $310,506 as of June 30, 2018. notable the County of Napa. Private contractors are also CNC. RFPoOrSmD’as tifoormna tion was the result of special previous effort by proposing an increase to the transient legislation that was sponsored by then-Senator Mike occupancy tax rate to fund certain activities under the Thompson and codified as part of Senate Bill (SB) 1306, supervision of a to-be-created parks department within which was signed by Governor Pete Wilson and became the County. The measure was rejected by close to three- effective on September 30, 1991. Notably, SB 1306 fifths of voters. expedited the formation of a parks and open space district in Napa County to include an exemption from By the mid-2000s, interest in establishing elevated public receiving written approval from LAFCO1. Despite SB park and open space services was renewed in anticipation 1306’s enactment, the formation of a parks and open of the County preparing an update to its General Plan. In space district in Napa County did not immediately follow. October 2005, an advisory committee issued a report to An initial formation attempt was presented to voters in the Board of Supervisors that concluded the County November 1992 and accompanied by a second measure lacked the organizational capacity to effectively aimed at increasing the local sales tax rate to provide implement and manage parks and open space projects, funding for the proposed parks and open space district. and therefore recommended the formation of an Successful passage of the two measures was dependent independent district. Significantly, the advisory on each action being separately approved. Accordingly, committee envisioned the County supporting the parks while formation proceedings were approved, the parks and open space district while assisting in the development and open space district was not formed given nearly two- of independent revenue sources. The Board of thirds of voters rejected the proposed sales tax increase. Supervisors ultimately approved the advisory committee’s recommendation with voters approving Interest in establishing elevated public parks and open formation proceedings by close to a three-fifths amount space services in Napa County persisted throughout the along with electing five board members in November 1990s and ultimately led to a second ballot attempt in 2006. November 2000. This second attempt differed from the 1Similar exemptions from LAFCO proceedings involving park and open space district formations had been approved by the Legislature for Marin, Sacramento, San Diego, Solano and Sonoma Counties. Page | 9 FINAL Napa County Regional Park and Open Space District Municipal Service Review and Sphere of Influence Update 2019 DNC. RAPdOoSDp’st ejudri sBdioctuionnadl aboruinedsar y is 791.4 square adopted by the Commission in 2010. Although eligible to miles or 506,517 acres in size and includes all expand into other counties, there have been no changes unincorporated and incorporated lands within Napa to NCRPOSD’s jurisdictional boundary since County. The jurisdictional boundary is conterminous formation2. with NCRPOSD’s sphere of influence, which was E. Population and Growth 1. Population Trends (Source: California Department of Finance) Resident Population Estimates NCRPOSD’s current resident population is the last five years, equaling a 0.46% annual increase. estimated at 141,294 based on demographic The following table depicts resident population information published by the California estimates over the last six years. Six years are Department of Finance for Napa County. The provided to better show the population trend. resident population overall has risen by 2.3% over FIGURE 2 POPULATION 143,000 141,784.00 142,028.00 142,000 141,294.00 141,000 140,898.00 140,000 139,000 138,000 138,038.00 138,383.00 137,000 136,000 2013 2014 2015 2016 2017 2018 2 California Public Resources Code 5502 Page | 10 FINAL Napa County Regional Park and Open Space District Municipal Service Review and Sphere of Influence Update 2019 (Source: Association of Bay Area Governments, ABAG, Projections and Priorities 2013) Future Resident Population Projections Demographic estimates prepared by the Association of population will increase by 0.7% annually through 2040 Bay Area Governments project Napa County’s annual as summarized below. FIGURE 3 ABAG POPULATION PROJECTIONS Annual Category 2015 2020 2025 2030 2035 2040 0 Change Population 140,300 144,200 148,600 153,100 158,400 163,700 0.7% 2. Growth Trends Relating to Public Parks and Open Space Public park and open space growth serve as a key service five years highlighted by Suscol Headwaters Phase I and indicator for NCRPOSD as it relates to addressing II, Smittle Creek (Cedar Roughs), Amy’s Cove and The current and future demands given its statutory-defined Cove. The following table summarizes NCRPOSD’s duties and powers. NCRPOSD has added a total of 1,363 public park and open space growth over the last five years acres of public parks and open space lands over the last in terms of total acreage and ratio to population. FIGURE 4 ACREAGE PER POPULATION 2014 Acreage Per 2018 Acreage Per Acreage 1,000 Residents Acreage 1,000 Residents 3,727 27 5,090 36 Page | 11 FINAL Napa County Regional Park and Open Space District Municipal Service Review and Sphere of Influence Update 2019 F. Organizational Structure 1. Governance NCRPOSD is organized under the Public Resources annually electing a President and Vice-President for Code Sections 5500 to 5595 and is known as the Regional purposes of serving as the presiding officers. Elections Park, Park and Open Space, and Open Space District are based on a registered-voter system. NCRPOSD is Law. This legislation was originally established in 1933 statutorily empowered to obtain grants, accept gifts, and with the intent of providing local communities with collect fees for services provided. NCRPOSD is also organizational alternatives in preserving, improving, and authorized to raise revenues through property protecting park, wildlife, open space, and beach lands. assessments and taxes subject to voter approval. Special districts under this legislation generally have NCRPOSD meetings are generally conducted on the broad authority to construct, improve, operate, and second Monday of each month. Special meetings are maintain a system of public parks, playgrounds, golf scheduled as needed. Meetings are held at the Napa courses, beaches, trails, and natural areas. County Board of Supervisors Chambers. A review of agency records for the 2018 calendar year identifies NCRPOSD’s governing body is comprised of an NCRPOSD held 11 meetings. There have been no independently elected five-member board of directors complaints about NCRPOSD filed by Napa County (“Board”) representing the five supervisorial wards. residents or neighboring organizations. Board terms are four years. The Board is responsible for 2. Administration NCRPOSD contracts with the County and private with other public agencies, non-profit organizations, and contractors for most staff support services, as well as community groups. NCRPOSD contracts with the directly employees seasonal, temporary and a few full- County for five full-time positions and seven part-time time permanent employees. This includes appointing a employees, and directly for four full-time employees and County employee to serve as an at-will General Manager fourteen part-time and seasonal workers for a total of for purposes of administering daily activities. The twelve to fourteen equivalent full-time employees. General Manager’s principal tasks include identifying District officers contracted through the County include park, recreation, and open space conversion the General Manager, District Counsel, District Auditor, opportunities, developing project proposals, obtaining and District Secretary. necessary funding for permits, and forming partnerships GNC. RMPOuSnDi cpiproavild eSs ear vraincgee so f municipal services of recreational trails throughout Napa County. involving the operation and resource-management of Additionally, NCRPOSD has assumed management public parks and open space in Napa County. responsibilities for two State Parks to prevent their NCRPOSD has acquired over 5,000 acres of open space closure by the State: Bothe-Napa Valley State Park, Bale since formation and currently manages approximately Grist Mill, and soon is expected to also manage Robert 2,800 acres of public parks. In total, NCRPOSD has Louis Stevenson State Park. constructed, repaired, and/or maintained over 50 miles Page | 12 FINAL Napa County Regional Park and Open Space District Municipal Service Review and Sphere of Influence Update 2019 1. Master Plan NCRPOSD’s activities are guided by a master plan. The recreational and open space policies in the County of District is currently conducting its 2019 Master Plan Napa General Plan. All projects identified in the master Update which has been released for public review. The plan are predicated on achieving four interrelated goals: master plan is primarily focused on implementing key a) provide opportunities for outdoor recreation through developing a system of parks, trails, water resource activities, open space, and related facilities b) preserve, restore, and protect open space lands, natural resources, and special habitat areas c) provide historical and environmental educational programming opportunities d) provide for agency management and interagency partnerships 2. District Projects The District provides public access to the following through easement or by contract. Appendix D projects as noted on the map (Figure 5). In some includes a list of properties with data regarding cases, NCRPOSD owns the park or open space and ownership or easement agreements. in other cases the District manages public access FIGURE 5 PUBLIC ACCESS PROJECTS (SOURCE: NCRPOSD) Page | 13 FINAL Napa County Regional Park and Open Space District Municipal Service Review and Sphere of Influence Update 2019 is located entered into an agreement with the immediately north of the City of Calistoga County to improve and operate the Oanadt is 8H.3i lml ilesM inin leen gthT rtoatialling 9.9 acres. trail for public use, including This trail was first developed as a dirt road providing signage installation, in the 1890s and overlays the southeast erosion control, and vegetation portion of Robert Louis Stevenson State management.3 The trail was open Park. The County maintains an easement for public use in May 2008 and is underlying the trail, which was originally actively maintained by volunteers. constructed as part of a mercury mining NCRPOSD estimates the trail operation before being abandoned as a generated approximately 18,000 public road in the 1970s. In April 2007, NCRPOSD visitors in 2017, of these 88 percent were hikers while most of the rest were mountain bikers. is is a protected watershed of the Napa River. approximately 73.0 acres in size and located NCRPOSD entered into an agreement with eNaastp oaf thRei vTeorw nE ocfo lYooguinctavli lleR. Teshee rrveeserve CDFW in December 2008 to maintain the overlays lands owned by California public portion of the reserve. No formal Department of Fish and Wildlife (CDFW) and counts exist with regards to identifying usage. is an redevelopment plans for the area. Future plans also approximate 224-acre open space area on the include acquiring an additional 80 acres from the Land Bsoeurtrhyweessts asi deV oifs Ltaak e WBeirlrdyeesrsnae osns lanPda NrkCRPOSD Trust of Napa County and other acquisitions to purchased from the Napa County Land Trust in expand habitat protection and provide overland February 2008. Public access is currently limited to access. The estimated cost to develop the park, make watercraft with plans to eventually establish land related improvements and acquire additional land is access via the Lake Berryessa Trail, which is $1 million. Grants will be pursued to cover contemplated in the Bureau of Reclamation’s construction and acquisition costs while volunteers will be utilized for operations. is 8.0 miles in Knoxville Road. In addition, the length along the eastern boundary of Napa District secured permission at no BCoeurnrytye nsesaar LPaekaek B eTrrryaeislsa on CDFW and cost from CDFG and BLM for the BLM lands. NCRPOSD obtained a no-cost remaining portion of the trail. easement from a neighboring landowner to Volunteers will be utilized to secure access to the lands from Berryessa- maintain and to repair 2018 fire damage to signs and fence stiles. 3 The trail is secured by a non-exclusive easement maintained by the County. Page | 14 FINAL Napa County Regional Park and Open Space District Municipal Service Review and Sphere of Influence Update 2019 is approximately 30.0 acres serving youth and community groups. Volunteer in size located along a former camp hosts are utilized for on- BCaoym Spc oBuetr rreyceresastaio Pnaalr ksite on site monitoring and camp fees the northwest side of Lake pay for additional operations. Berryessa north of Putah Creek The District is evaluating a on Bureau of Reclamation second phase that could include (BOR) land. The District another 32 beds, central dining constructed and operates the hall and expanded wastewater camp under an agreement with system. Initial estimates for this BOR. The camp includes a 64 bed (tent cabins) facility phase are up to $1.5 million District operates the two parks within budget and without County-funded Bothe Napa Valley State Park and Bale Grist assistance. NCRPOSD has NCRPOSD saved these parks from Mcloisllu re bSyt tahtee S tateH inis 2t0o1r2ic. S incPe athrakt increased revenues without raising fees and time the District has made park cut expenses through more improvements, as well as, addressing efficient operations. years of deferred maintenance. The cabin. Currently the District and State Parks are NCRPOSD informally operates this park which negotiating a 20-year operating agreement which will Rinoclbuederdt Lreopuaiirs oSft eav esnmsaolln cSabtaint ef oPr arakn o(Rn-LsSit)e formalize the District’s management of RLS. The caretaker and trail repairs and signage. Unfortunately, District has repaired the water system and is in the the 2017 wildfires damaged the water system to the process of repairing two other structures. is approximately awarded to cover construction 673 acres in size located north of Chiles costs while volunteers, have Manod oProep Ce rVeaelkle yPs aornk land NCRPOSD been utilized for the majority of purchased in December 2008. The operations. A District employee District manages this municipal rents one of the homes and lives watershed land (Moore Creek Unit), as on the property as a caretaker. well as, 900 acres owned by the City of Budget projections to acquire Napa (Lake Hennessey Unit). Over 20,000 people undeveloped parcels to protect used the park trails in 2017. Grants have been the watershed are estimated at $30 million. Page | 15 FINAL Napa County Regional Park and Open Space District Municipal Service Review and Sphere of Influence Update 2019 The District has The District has worked in partnership with the Vine worked in partnership with the City of American Trail Coalition, since portions of the Vine Trail share CNaanpyao n Rtoiv ceorn satrnudct aBbaoyu t T5 rmaiilles of the trail, with alignment with the Napa River and Bay Trail. The approximately 4 miles to be completed. (This initial District is expecting to hold the trail easement and portion of the trail is managed by American Canyon.) manage a short segment which will be part of the The District has also constructed another 0.7 miles of Napa Pipe property redevelopment. Construction of the trail under the Butler Bridge connecting to Suscol a boardwalk along the edge of Fagan Marsh will Ferry Road. require a permit from CDFW. The budget projection for completed project is estimated at $2.5 million. FIGURE 6 TRAIL USAGE MAY 2016-AUGUST 2018 (SOURCE: NCRPOSD) Napa River & Bay Moore Creek 24,07218% Park 40,437 29% River to Ridge 21,11715% Oat Hill Mine 52,71538% Page | 16 FINAL Napa County Regional Park and Open Space District Municipal Service Review and Sphere of Influence Update 2019 FIGURE 7 PLANNED PUBLIC ACCESS (SOURCE: NCRPOSD) at the peak of Mt. Veeder and boasts 360-degree views. Both In 2015 Amy’s Grove, a 51-acre property, was Mt. Veeder including Amy’s Grove and The properties burned in the 2017 donated to the District. The District has an option to Cexopvaen d Amy’s Grove through the purchase of an firestorm with The Cove suffering the greatest damage. additional 164 acres and accepting a donation of an The District plans to replace additional 7 acres. To the west is The Cove which campground improvements so it was owned by the Girl Scouts of Northern can continue to be used by Girl California. In 2016 the District purchased this 160- Scouts, Boy Scouts and other acre rustic camp on Mt. Veeder. The Cove is located groups. encompasses 709 mitigation funds. In addition to providing watershed acres and includes the upper watershed of Suscol protection, endangered species are protected along SCuresecko. lL Haneda dacwqauitseitriosn P wreass eorbvteained with funding with a Native American cultural site. The Bay Area from the region’s Priority Conservation Area (PCA) Ridge Trail can be extended an additional five miles program, and from mitigation funds required for the through the Preserve. The District plans to reduce Highway 12 improvements. The PCA program for soil erosion, construct several miles of trails and a funding is managed by the Napa Valley trailhead staging area to provide public access. The Transportation Authority, the Metropolitan estimate for these projects is $500,000. Transportation Commission and the Association of Bay Area Governments. The Napa Valley Transportation Authority was an instrumental partner in obtaining both the PCA and Highway 12 Page | 17 FINAL Napa County Regional Park and Open Space District Municipal Service Review and Sphere of Influence Update 2019 has a boat launch. The District plans to maintain consists of 2,790 Putah Creek Land Bank (Spanish Valley, the existing recreation uses acres of land bank in the Lake Berryessa area. Spanish CVrayllesyt ale Fnclaotmsp aanssde sS to1,n9e00 C oarcrraesl) south of Lake enjoyed by property owners in the adjacent Lake Berryessa Estates and links together several hundred Berryessa Estates, while acres of federal government land. Crystal Flats eventually also providing consists of 684 acres along the Putah Creek and for general public use. includes an unimproved campground. Stone Corral access to the 6,500-acre Cedar Roughs Wilderness managed by the BLM. The District plans to obtain is a 443-acre land Smittle Creek (Cedar Use Permits to construct trails and open the area to holding which protects nRaotuurgahl sh)abitat. The land the public. Estimates of $50,000 are needed to construct trails and obtain permits. holding will provide public Page | 18 FINAL Napa County Regional Park and Open Space District Municipal Service Review and Sphere of Influence Update 2019 3. Pending Services is intended to be estimated cost to develop the trail and approximately 44.0 miles in total make related improvements ranges from Vleningeth Trgaenile rally along State $34.0 to $49.0 million. Grants and Highway 29 between the Vallejo private donations will be pursued to Ferry Terminal and the City of cover construction and operational costs. Calistoga. NCRPOSD has The District’s role so far has been entered into an agreement with minimal. NCRPOSD is coordinating the non-profit Vine Train with Vine Trail Coalition on the route Coalition to partner as needed in through Bothe Napa Valley State Park, planning, funding, and and about to obtain an easement to operating the project. The accommodate a short section of trail on private land just south of Kennedy Park. was intended to be property, the plan now is to jointly manage the BLM approximately 480 acres in size located adjacent to the land as part of the Spanish Valley project. The Buneirnrcyoerpsosraa teEds Btaertreyse ssPa aErsktates community on land estimated cost to develop the BLM land and make owned by BLM. NCRPOSD has applied to BLM for related improvements is $50,000. Grants will be a no-fee transfer of the land given its surplus pursued to cover construction costs while volunteers designation by the Federal government. With the will be utilized for operations. This project is waiting District obtaining the adjacent Spanish Valley for BLM to complete their part. is an approximate 850-acre public Dodd) now under wilderness park owned by the State of California consideration by the State lSokcyatleind es oPutahrekast of the City of Napa near the Napa legislature would authorize State Hospital. The State authorized the County of either the County or the Napa to acquire the property in 2011, but the two District to acquire the could not agree on price. New legislation (SB 20: property to assure it remains a public park in perpetuity. is an approximate 1,500-acre area surplus. Acquisition of the project site would protect located east of the City of Napa beyond Skyline Park against private development, as well as, potentially oVna lllaenjdo oLwankeed sby the City of Vallejo, approximately serve as a trail extension involving Skyline Park. The 135 acres of which are within Napa County. estimated cost of the property is not known. This NCRPOSD has initiated discussions to purchase the project is currently on hold, pending action by the project site given Vallejo has designated the land as City of Vallejo. Page | 19 FINAL Napa County Regional Park and Open Space District Municipal Service Review and Sphere of Influence Update 2019 H. Financial 1. Assets, Liabilities, and Net Position Financial Highlights (FY 2017-2018) Source: Independent Audit Report, Brown Armstrong, CPAs • The District ended the year with a fund balance of $1,546,443, a decrease of $376,884 from the prior year. Of that amount, $91,990 is restricted for future expenditures at Moore Creek, $62,721 is restricted for future expenditures at Suscol Headwaters, and $1,081,226 is restricted and assigned for future expenditures at the State Parks, $310,506 available for general District operations. • The County of Napa continued its support for the District’s operations and projects, granting funds from its Transient Occupancy Tax in the amount of $979,925. • The District organized just over 10,000 hours of volunteer work projects, valued at over $201,000 and received $494,225 in donations (includes cash and in-kind). • Program revenues (camping fees, day use fees, and rental income) were $808,086, which covers approximately 18 percent of District expenses for the fiscal year. If land acquisition costs are removed, program revenues cover 42 percent of District expenses. Since the formation of the District in 2006, the District has matched County grant support with other sources of support (grants, gifts, direct and indirect donations, and volunteer labor) at a ratio of 3.02 to 1. • The District completed its sixth full year of operation of Bothe-Napa Valley State Park and the Bale Grist Mill State Historic Park, and ended the year with a fund balance sufficient to continue to undertake extensive repairs to historic buildings and other deferred maintenance within the park. NCRPOSD contracts with a private consulting firm identifying NCRPOSD’s assets, liabilities, and net to prepare an annual report following the end of position as of June 30, 2018. These audited financial each fiscal year summarizing the agency’s overall statements provide quantitative measurements in financial standing. The most recent report was assessing NCRPOSD’s short and long-term fiscal prepared by Brown Armstrong for the 2017-2018 health and are summarized in the following sections. fiscal year and includes audited financial statements Page | 20 FINAL Napa County Regional Park and Open Space District Municipal Service Review and Sphere of Influence Update 2019 Assets NCRPOSD’s assets at the end of 2017-2018 totaled dues from other governments, and prepaid dues.4 Assets $15.659 million. Assets classified as current, with the classified as non-current represented the remaining amount expectation they could be liquidated into currency within a and are associated with recent land acquisitions, buildings, year, represented 11.4% of the total amount. Current assets and equipment.5 are tied to cash investments with the County Treasurer, FIGURE 8 ASSETS: FIVE-YEAR CHART Category 2013-2014 2014-2154 2015-2016 2016-2017 2017-2018 Current Assets $1,425,521 $1,792,257 $1,680,271 $2,121,170 $1,781,558 Non-Current Assets $7,352,612 $7,492,626 $10,598,964 $10,578,492 $13,878,020 Total Assets $8,778,133 $9,284,883 $12,279,235 $12,699,662 $15,659,578 LiabNilCiRtiPeOsS D’s liabilities at the end of 2017-18 totaled entire total amount and are tied to accounts payable $0.235 million. Current liabilities representing and unearned revenue.6 obligations owed within a year accounted for the FIGURE 9 LIABILITIES: FIVE-YEAR CHART Category 2013-2014 2014-2015 2015-2016 2016-2017 2017-2018 Current Liabilities $216,269 $412,655 $193,648 $197,843 $235,115 Non-Current Liabilities $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 Total Liabilities $216,269 $412,655 $193,648 $197,843 $235,115 4 Current assets totaled $1.782 million and include cash investments 5 Non-current assets totaled $13.878 million and include land ($13.363 ($1.759 million), due from other governments ($0.013 million), and million), buildings net of depreciation ($0.503 million), and equipment net “prepaids” ($0.009 million). of depreciation ($0.012 million). 6 Current liabilities totaled $0.235 million and include accounts payable ($0.066 million) and customer deposits ($0.162 million). Page | 21 FINAL Napa County Regional Park and Open Space District Municipal Service Review and Sphere of Influence Update 2019 Net PosNitCioRnPO SD’s net position at the end of 2017-18 investments in capital assets, restricted, and totaled $15.424 million. This amount represents the unrestricted. Net investment in capital assets difference between NCRPOSD’s total assets and represents 89.9% of the total. total liabilities. The amount is divided between net FIGURE 10 NET POSITION: FIVE-YEAR CHART Category 2013-2014 2014-2015 2015-2016 2016-2017 2017-2018 Invested in $7,352,612 $7,492,626 $10,598,964 $10,578,492 $13,878,020 Capital Assets Restricted $697,911 $886,544 $1,101,899 $1,211,015 $1,235,937 Unrestricted $511,341 $493,058 $384,724 $712,312 $310,506 Total Net $8,561,864 $8,872,228 $12,085,587 $12,501,819 $15,424,463 Position NCRPOSD’s financial statements for 2017-2018 Calculations performed assessing NCRPOSD’s reflect the District experienced a positive change in liquidity, capital, and solvency indicate the District its fiscal standing over the last five completed fiscal finished 2017-18 in strong financial health. Liquidity years as its overall net position increased by 44.5% remained high as NCRPOSD finished with current from $8.561 to $15.424 million. This increase is assets more than seven times greater than its current attributed to the purchase of land, buildings, and liabilities. 8 NCRPOSD’s capital also remained through separate grant awards and donations.7 entirely intact given it finished with no long-term debt while maintaining a positive operating margin. . FIGURE 11 FINANCIAL STATEMENTS 2017-18 Assets $15.660 million Liabilities $0.235 million Equity $15.425 million 7 For the fiscal year ending June 30, 2018, NCRPOSD owned the acres in Phase I of the Suscol Headwaters and 298 acres in Phase II; 443 following: 224 acres of land known as Berryessa Vista Wilderness Park; acres of land at Smittle Creek; 51 acres at Amy’s Grove; and160 acres at 673 acres of land with two residences known as Moore Creek Park; The Cove. NCRPOSD acquired an all-terrain vehicle valued at $10,375 approximately 2,790 other acres known as Spanish Valley, Crystal Flats, through a donation from the Napa Valley State Parks Association. and Stone Corral; 0.2 acres known as the Keene parcel within the Lake 8 NCRPOSD’s current ratio in 2017-18 was 7.6:1. Berryessa Estates subdivision; 40 acres along the Oat Hill Mine Trail; 411 Page | 22 FINAL Napa County Regional Park and Open Space District Municipal Service Review and Sphere of Influence Update 2019 2. ReveNnCuRPeO aSDn dha Es nxop deednicsaete dT traxe bnadse sa nd instead A review of NCRPOSD’s audited and pre-audited relies on grants, program income, and donations of financial statements identifies the District has labor and materials. The County provides a grant maintained positive cash flow over four of the last using a portion of the Transient Occupancy Tax five fiscal years. In fiscal year 2017-18 the District (TOT), which totaled $979,925 in 2017-18. The five- intentionally approved a budget with expenditures year grant agreement between NCRPOSD and the exceeding revenues to draw down reserves. County terminates in 2023. It is expected the County Revenues and expenses in fiscal years 2015-16 and will renew the grant for another five years under 2017-18 include capital outlays for land acquisitions. substantially similar terms as the present grant. This The following table summarizes total actual financing structure indicates NCRPOSD is revenues and expenses between 2013-2014 and challenged with respect to addressing existing 2017-2018. service needs and deficiencies, as well as, meeting future service demands. FIGURE 12 REVENUES AND EXPENSES: FIVE-YEAR TABLE (Operations and Capital Outlays) $6,000,000 $5,000,000 $4,000,000 $3,000,000 $2,000,000 $1,000,000 $0 2013-14 2014-15 2015-16 2016-17 2017-18 Actual Revenues $1,336,462 $2,104,539 $5,771,458 $1,657,135 $4,289,851 Actual Expenses $1,241,610 $1,934,189 $5,664,437 $1,220,431 $4,666,735 NCRPOSD’s revenues and expenses fall within two outlays, such as land purchases and facility broad categories: operations and capital outlays. improvements, are funded through a variety of external Operations are predominantly dependent on receiving an grant and donation sources. annual operating grant from the County while capital Page | 23 FINAL Napa County Regional Park and Open Space District Municipal Service Review and Sphere of Influence Update 2019 Importantly, in terms of operations, it has been the year to be generally equal to 12.5% of the prior practice of the County to provide funding to year’s TOT collection. Accordingly, the actual NCRPOSD in an amount equal to 60% of the amount of operation funding provided to County’s Special Projects Fund. The County sets its NCRPOSD changes annually as reflected in the Special Projects Fund at the beginning of each fiscal following table. FIGURE 13 PERCENTAGE COUNTY FUNDING: FIVE-YEAR (Excludes Capital Outlays) 1.8 1.6 1.4 1.2 1 0.8 0.6 0.4 0.2 0 2013-14 2014-15 2015-16 2016-17 2017-18 Other Sources $542,655 $582,660 $656,079 $693,430 $804,039 County funding $688,413 $753,607 $811,638 $894,440 $979,925 % County Contribution 55.92% 56.40% 55.30% 56.33% 54.93% 3. CurFrIGeUnREt 1B4u AdDgOePTtE D BUDGET 2018-19 revenues total $2.103 million with the resulting Total Expenses: $2.584 million $0.480 million deficit intentionally budgeted to draw Total Revenues: $2.103 million down on the available fund balance.9 NCRPOSD’s 13 governmental fund units are summarized in the Difference: ($0.480 million) following section. NCRPOSD’s adopted budget for the 2018-19 fiscal year totals $2.584 million. This amount represents NCRPOSD’s total approved expenses or appropriations for the fiscal year within its 13 established governmental fund units. Budgeted 9 NCRPOSD’s available fund balance totaled $1.546 million as of July 1, 2018. Page | 24 snoilliM FINAL Napa County Regional Park and Open Space District Municipal Service Review and Sphere of Influence Update 2019 NCRPOSD’s general operations budget unit contract with the County. Approved revenues total Gsuepnpeorrtasl b Oaspice rDaitsitorincts administrative and operation $417,635 and budgeted to be drawn from a $409,135 activities. Approved expenses total $417,635 with portion of NCRPOSD’s operating grant from the the majority of the amount dedicated to costs County of Napa, as well as, interest earned on the associated with NCRPOSD’s staff support services District’s fund balance.10 maintaining houses, maintaining trails and removal Budgeted expenses $130.286 eMxcoeoerde rCerveeneuke Ps aartk $ 52,600 of invasive species. The majority of budgeted revenues due to construction are tied to a portion of maintenance (new roof and NCRPOSD’s operating grant well) which is funded from from the County with the capital improvement funds remaining amount tied to rent generated from rental set aside in prior years for this purpose. Usual housing located within the park and donations. budgeted expenses are tied to park monitoring, Budgeted expenses and revenues match at $169,322. mercury cleanup project. All budgeted revenues are OBuadt gHetieldl Meixnpeen Tsersa ila re tied to trail monitoring, tied to a portion of NCRPOSD’s operating grant erosion control, entry gate improvements, and a from the County. Budgeted expenses and revenues match at $17,382. Cost estimate of $2.5 NBuadpgae tRediv eexrp aenndse sB aayre T rtiaeidl to maintaining the million is necessary to existing trail in the City of American Canyon and construct a boardwalk, under Butler Bridge, installation of interpretative bridge, additional levee signage, monitoring Napa Pipe, other gap closure trail and obtain projects, and improved mapping and signage. All permits necessary to budgeted revenues are tied to a portion of complete the trail. NCRPOSD’s operating grant from the County. Budgeted expenses and revenues match at $50,615. District is considering Phase II to expand the camp CBaudmgpet eBde rerxypeenssseas Paarer ktied to overseeing Camp to include another 32 beds, a central dining facility Berryessa usage. Budgeted revenues are divided and expanded wastewater system. The estimated between a portion of NCRPOSD’s operating grant cost of Phase II is $1.5 million. from the County and camping concessions. The 10 The remainder of the operating grant is allocated to support contract services within the 12 other governmental fund units. Page | 25 FINAL Napa County Regional Park and Open Space District Municipal Service Review and Sphere of Influence Update 2019 Budgeted expenses and revenues match at $104,311. operating grant from the BBuedrgreyteesds eax pVeinssteas Wariel dtieedr ntoe sms oPnaitrokring the 224- County. The District plans acre property, obtaining an overland access route, to acquire additional land campground improvements, and controlling from the Napa County Land unauthorized motor vehicle use. All budgeted Trust at an estimated cost of revenues are tied to a portion of NCRPOSD’s approximately $80,000. Budgeted expenses and revenues match at $27,761. to the 73 acre preserve located northeast of the NBuadpgae tRediv eexrp Eencsoelso garice atli eRde stoe rcvoen tinuation of a Town of Yountville. All budgeted revenues are tied portable toilet, controlling invasive plant species in to a portion of NCRPOSD’s operating grant from the entry meadow, and support for school field trips the County. Budgeted expenses and revenues match at $2,064. State Parks, and participating in Vine Trail VBuindege Tterda ielx penses are tied to coordinating Vine maintenance resolution projects. All budgeted Trail and Napa River Bay Trail alignment between revenues are tied to a portion of NCRPOSD’s the City of American Canyon and Soscol Ferry operating grant from the County. Road, supporting Vine Trail alignment that affects Putah Creek Land Bank (Spanish Valley, Budgeted expenses and revenues match at the campground and Crystal Flats. All C$1r5y,s3t2a4l. FBluadtsge atendd eSxtpoennese Cs oarrre atli)e d to budgeted revenues are tied to a portion completing a transfer with BLM, work on of NCRPOSD’s operating grant from accessibility for Spanish Valley, and the County. installation of a gate and fence between Budgeted expenses total two rental units for employees, repairs to the State Parks $1,022,482 exceeding boarded-up Recreation Hall and extensive deferred revenues of $737,450. maintenance. The new agreement with the State is The deficit will be drawn expected to include Robert Louis Stevenson State from available fund Park. The District helped repair an existing cabin for balance. Expenses are a live-in caretaker. Repairs are necessary after the tied to obtaining a new 2017 firestorm at an estimated cost of $50,000. operating agreement, Budgeted revenues total $566,000 and are tied to ongoing maintenance interest, rent, concessions, and donations. Deferred and operations, cabin maintenance could cost over $8 million. restoration, repair of Page | 26 FINAL Napa County Regional Park and Open Space District Municipal Service Review and Sphere of Influence Update 2019 Budgeted revenues of $307,407 studies, obtaining easements, permitting costs eSxucseceod le Hxpeeanddwituarteesr osf $248,463. and construction of red-legged frog habitat. Budgeted expenses are tied to Revenues include not only the County grant but monitoring, environmental also grazing lease revenues. Budgeted expenses and revenues match at are tied to reforestation and $A1m13y,1’s0 4G. r oTvhee a 2n0d1 7T hfiere Cstoovrme damaged both rebuilding. All budgeted revenues Amy’s Grove and The Cove. The intensity of the are tied to a portion of NCRPOSD’s fire in The Cove killed trees and destroyed operating grant from the County, as campground improvements. Budgeted expenses well as, some donations. Budgeted expenses and revenues Smmatictht laet C$1r3e,e82k1 (. CBeuddagert eRdo ughs) expenses are tied to monitoring and permitting. All budgeted revenues are tied to a portion of NCRPOSD’s operating grant from the County. Page | 27 FINAL Napa County Regional Park and Open Space District Municipal Service Review and Sphere of Influence Update 2019 I V. ENVIRONMENTAL REVIEW A. Municipal Service Review The municipal service review of NCRPOSD is a project resource evaluation activities, which do not result in any under the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA) serious or major disturbance to any environmental given it may reasonably result in a future indirect physical resource. This exemption applies to the municipal service change to the environment. The municipal service review review of NCRPOSD given it is strictly for information is categorically exempt from further environmental gathering purposes that may lead to an action which review under Code of Regulations Section 15306. This LAFCO has not approved, adopted, or funded. exemption applies to basic data collection, research, and B. Sphere of Influence Update The sphere of influence update for NCRPOSD is a can be seen with certainty there is no possibility the project under CEQA given it may reasonably result in action may have a significant effect on the a future indirect physical change to the environment. environment. This exemption applies to the sphere of The sphere of influence update is exempt from further influence update for NCRPOSD given it can be seen environmental review under Code of Regulations with certainty the affirmation of the existing sphere will Section 15061(b) (3). This exemption is referred to as not result in any physical changes to the environment. the “general rule” and applies to projects in which it Page | 28 FINAL Napa County Regional Park and Open Space District Municipal Service Review and Sphere of Influence Update 2019 V. SOURCES • John Woodbury, NCRPOSD General Manager A. Agency Contacts B. D • ocAussmociaetinont so f Bay Area Governments, “Projections and Priorities,” 2013 • Napa County Agreement No. 6782 with NCRPOSD • Napa County Agreement No. 7827 with NCRPOSD • NCRPOSD Bylaws, August 2008 • NCRPOSD Camp Berryessa Operations, Design, and Preliminary Engineering Study, January 2010 • NCRPOSD Management Agreement No. 11-LC-20-0194 for Development, Management, Operation, and Maintenance of Camp Berryessa • NCRPOSD Master Plan 2008-2013, January 2009 • NCRPOSD Master Plan 2012 Update, June 2012 • NCRPOSD Draft Master Plan 2019 Update, March 2019 • NCRPOSD Operating Agreement for Bothe-Napa Valley State Park and Bale Grist Mill State Historic Park • NCRPOSD Skyline Wilderness Park Master Plan, September 2009 • NCRPOSD “Audit Report for the Year Ended June 30, 2014,” (Gallina LLP) • NCRPOSD “Audit Report for the Year Ended June 30, 2015,” (Gallina LLP) • NCRPOSD “Audit Report for the Year Ended June 30, 2016,” (Brown Armstrong) • NCRPOSD “Audit Report for the Year Ended June 30, 2017,” (Brown Armstrong) • NCRPOSD “Audit Report for the Year Ended June 30, 2018,” (Brown Armstrong) • NCRPOSD “Budget for Fiscal Year 2013-14” • NCRPOSD “Budget for Fiscal Year 2014-2015” • NCRPOSD “Budget for Fiscal Year 2015-2016” • NCRPOSD “Budget for Fiscal Year 2016-2017” • NCRPOSD “Budget for Fiscal Year 2017-2018” • NCRPOSD “Budget for Fiscal Year 2018-19” • NCRPOSD “Year Seven Report,” March 2014 • NCRPOSD “Trail Usage May 2016-August 2018” Page | 29 FINAL Napa County Regional Park and Open Space District Municipal Service Review and Sphere of Influence Update 2019 • Napa County Regional Park and Open Space District, https://napaoutdoors.org/ C. Websites • Association of Bay Area Governments, https://abag.ca.gov/ • California State Controller’s Office, https://sco.ca.gov/ • California Special Districts Association, https://www.csda.net/home • California Department of Finance, http://www.dof.ca.gov/Forecasting/Demographics/ D. Appendix Napa County Regional Park and Open Space District Real Property Assets Fee Title Owner Fair Date Type of (if not Property Purchase Market Holding # Acquired Ownership District) Name APN's Acreage Distance Price Value* 1 8/21/07 Easement Napa 005-180- 24.14 donated County 019 Flood Control District n/a 2 2/26/08 Fee Simple Berryessa 019-220- 224 $125,414 $340,000 Land Vista 009; 019- 220-018; Ownership Wilderness 019-220- Park 026 3 Jun-08 Easement Land Trust Linda Falls 024-332- 38.93 donated n/a (replaced by of Napa 007 new County easement) 4 9/23/2008 Easement John and Berryessa 015-260- ~0.6 miles donated n/a Judy Peak Trail 004; 015- 260-010 Ahmann Page | 30 FINAL Napa County Regional Park and Open Space District Municipal Service Review and Sphere of Influence Update 2019 Real Property Assets (continued) Fee Title Owner Date Type of (if not Property Purchase Fair Market Holding # Acquired Ownership District) Name APN's Acreage Distance Price Value* 5 12/24/08 Fee Simple Moore Creek 025-440-010; 025- 673 $2,800,000 Ownership Open Space 200-034; 025-060- 023; 025-060-025 Park $3,000,000 Land portion $2,605,075 Building portion $394,925 6 2/24/2009 Easement John and Berryessa 015-260-004, -010; ~0.6 miles donated n/a (revised) Judy Peak Trail 015-250-006 Ahmann 7 3/16/2009 Fee Simple Mildren 016-221-001 0.2 donated n/a Land Keene Ownership donation 8 5/10/2010 Easement VCC- Napa River 046-630-007 4,000 lf donated n/a Napa LLC Trail Segment 8 9 12/29/2010 Fee Simple Spanish 015-070-011, -012; 2,790 donated $4,250,000 Land Valley, 015-080-003, - Ownership Crystal Flats 010; 016-100-015, - and Stone 016; 016-120-003, - Corral 004, -014, -016, - 017, -020, -021, - 023, -024, -025, - 026; 016-140-004, - 010, -012, -014 10 12/16/2014 Fee Simple Randy 18-030-026 40 donated $132,000 Land Johnson Ownership Property (OHMT) 11 10/7/2015 Fee Simple Suscol 057-020-077 411 $900,000 $900,000 Land Headwaters (partial), 057-030- Ownership Phase I 012 (partial) (former Kirkland Ranch) Page | 31 FINAL Napa County Regional Park and Open Space District Municipal Service Review and Sphere of Influence Update 2019 Real Property Assets (continued) Fee Title Owner Type of (if not Property Purchase Fair Market Holding # Date Acquired Ownership District) Name APN's Acreage Distance Price Value* 12 12/18/2015 Fee Simple Smittle 025-220- 443 $1,410,000 $1,410,000 Land Creek 016, -017, - Ownership (Cedar 018 Roughs) 13 12/18/2015 Fee Simple Amy's 034-370- 51 donated by $590,000 Land Grove 034, 034- Chamberlain Ownership 040-015 Family 14 11/4/2016 Easement Land Trust Linda Falls 024-332- 176 donated n/a of Napa 004, 024- County 332-- 022,024-282- 017, 025- 041-013 15 12/8/2017 Fee Simple Suscol portions of 298 $2,580,000 $2,580,000 Land Headwaters 045-360- Ownership Phase II 016, -017 16 12/18/2017 Fee Simple The Cove 034-360- 160 $740,000 $740,000 Land 017, 034- Ownership 360-032 and -033 17 5/23/2018 Easement Tuteur Napa- 045-370- 1.6 miles donated n/a Family Solono 001 Trust Ridge Trail Loop Notes: * per appraisal at time of purchase Totals January 2018 Fee 5,090 Manage Easement 200.14 Trail Page | 32