City of Jurupa Valley MSR – Final, December 11, 2014

Final December 11, 2014 LAFCO 2014-15-2 RIVERSIDE LOCAL AGENCY FORMATION COMMISSION City of Jurupa Valley Municipal Service Review Riverside Local Agency Formation Commission 3850 Vine Stree t Ste. 240 Riverside, CA 92507 Phone: (951) 369-0631 www.lafco.org Table oof Contennts I. Overrview .................................................................................................................................................. 1 II. Service Review Process ...................................................................................................................... 3 III. Agenncy Overvieew ................................................................................................................................... 3 A. Governing Body ............................................................................................................................... 3 B. BBasic Financcial Informaation .......................................................................................................... 4 C. Population && Growth ...................................................................................................................... 8 IV. Services.................................................................................................................................................... 8 A. Police Protecction ............................................................................................................................. 9 B. Fire Protection ................................................................................................................................ 12 C. Park and Reccreation ..................................................................................................................... 13 D. WWater & Wasstewater ..................................................................................................................... 15 E. RRoad Mainteenance ........................................................................................................................ 17 F. SStreet Lighting ............................................................................................................................... 17 G. SStreet Sweepping ............................................................................................................................ 18 H. SSolid Waste ..................................................................................................................................... 18 I. LLibrary Servvice ............................................................................................................................... 18 J. AAnimal Conttrol ............................................................................................................................... 19 K. DDisadvantagged Unincorrporated Coommunitiess .................................................................... 19 V. Spheere of Influeence ............................................................................................................................. 19 VI. Determinations ..................................................................................................................................... 20 List off Exhibits City of JJurupa Valleey Map foollowing page 2 General Plan Land Use Map foollowing page 8 Zoning MMap foollowing page 8 Pavement Condition Map foollowing page 17 I. Overview LAFCOs are mandated by the Cortese-Knox-Hertzberg Reorganization Act of 2000 (CKH) to encourage orderly development within their county of jurisdiction. The Act governs the boundaries of special districts and cities, consistent with each agency’s principal act. To implement boundary changes, CKH directs LAFCOs to make reorganization decisions based on several factors, including the need for and efficiency of public services. To promote greater efficiency in services for future planning purposes, CKH mandates LAFCOs to conduct Sphere of Influence (SOI) reviews once every five years, as necessary. SOIs are used as a planning tool for agencies to conduct service and facility planning for areas it intends to serve in the future. A SOI is defined as “a plan for probable physical boundaries and service area of a local agency, as determined by the Commission.” Consistent with Commission SOI policies, a SOI can be a) coterminous to agency boundaries as the ultimate foreseen configuration of the agency in anticipation of no future growth, b) extended beyond the agency boundaries in anticipation of future growth, c) be smaller, indicating the need to detach areas from the agency boundaries, or d) be designated a “zero sphere”, which indicates a potential dissolution of the agency. In order to amend the sphere of influence boundaries, formal approval from the Commission is required. Prior to or in conjunction with SOI reviews, a Municipal Service Review (MSR) must be prepared pursuant to Government Code Section 56430. MSRs are conducted to assist in the SOI review process by providing information regarding the ability of agencies to provide public services. This Municipal Service Review will review the services provided by the City of Jurupa Valley and, to a lesser extent, services provided within Jurupa Valley by other agencies. Pursuant to 56430 (a), the MSR will make the following determinations: (1) Growth and population projections for the affected area. (2) Disadvantaged Unincorporated Communities (DUCs) Characteristics. (3) Present and planned capacity of public facilities and adequacy of public services, including infrastructure needs or deficiencies including needs or deficiencies related to sewers, municipal and industrial water, and structural fire protection in any DUC within or contiguous to the sphere of influence. (4) Financial ability of agencies to provide services. (5) Status of, and opportunities for, shared facilities. (6) Accountability for community service needs, including governmental structure or operational efficiencies. (7) Any other matter related to effective or efficient service delivery, as required by the Commission. Provided below is a summary of what each determination will assess. City of Jurupa Valley MSR – Final Page 1 (1) Growth and population projections for the affected area. This will evaluate the method of projection and its relationship to services and facility planning. (2) Disadvantaged Unincorporated Communities (DUCs) Characteristics. Identifies the location and characteristics of any disadvantaged unincorporated communities within or contiguous to the sphere of influence. (3) Present and planned capacity of public facilities and adequacy of public services, including infrastructure needs or deficiencies including needs or deficiencies related to sewers, municipal and industrial water, and structural fire protection in any DUC within or contiguous to the sphere of influence. The review will assess standard/objective levels of municipal services in relation to the current level of services as well as future plans to attain those objectives and/or maintain existing level of services. (4) Financial ability of agencies to provide services. Identifies the status of reserves, recent expenses vs. revenues, its purpose, tax rate and when the debt will be retired. In addition, general taxes, special taxes and assessments will be identified in relation to the services funded by those monies. In extreme cases, agencies not financially capable of providing the basic services will be identified. (5) Status of, and opportunities for, shared facilities. To promote greater efficiency in public services, the MSR explores opportunities for different agencies to share facilities and/or resources. By sharing facilities or other resources, agencies can eliminate the duplication of studies, planning efforts, staff or equipment, and potentially lower the cost for providing services. (6) Accountability for community service needs, including governmental structure and operational efficiencies. Identifies efforts made by the agency to increase public participation and accountability. Also, discusses whether audits are performed and how they are made available to the public. (7) Any other matter related to effective or efficient service delivery, as required by Commission policy. This will allow LAFCO to identify areas outside an agency’s boundaries currently receiving or requesting services from the agency. Also, identifies inhabited areas within or outside the current sphere of influence that the City anticipates annexing within the next five years or that could benefit from services provided by the agency. Issues unique to a particular agency or geographic area will be explored. City of Jurupa Valley MSR – Final Page 2 II. Service Review Process In preparation of the MSR, public agency input is very important. To begin the MSR process the affected agencies were sent a questionnaire regarding services provided. Through a combination of responses from the questionnaires, follow-up conversations with the agencies and research, the MSR is prepared. Agencies are encouraged to review and comment on a draft prior to the document being presented to the Commission. This is an opportunity to address any concerns of the affected agencies regarding the data presented. After conducting the public hearing, the Commission will adopt determinations and receive and file the MSR. III. Agency Overview The City of Jurupa Valley incorporated July 1, 2011 as the 28th and most recently incorporated city in the County of Riverside. It is located east of Interstate 15 and the City of Eastvale, generally north and west of the Santa Ana River and the City of Riverside, and south of the San Bernardino/Riverside County line. The City encompasses approximately 43.7 square miles. The Jurupa Valley is a large, established community with a variety of urban and rural land uses consisting of residential, agricultural, commercial, public uses, and industrial uses. The City is an amalgam of several diverse sub-communities including Glen Avon, Rubidoux, Belltown, Mira Loma, Sky Country, Sunnyslope, Jurupa, Jurupa Hills and Pedley. Rubidoux has an urban setting of mixed land uses inclusive of single and multi-family residential, commercial and public land uses. Jurupa and Jurupa Hills areas are primarily suburban residential and include two golf courses. Much of the remaining sub communities can be characterized as rural or semi- rural in nature. A significant amount of industrial, logistics and some commercial development has occurred along the I-15 corridor and along the 60 freeway near the I-15/SR 60 interchange. A. Governing Body The City of Jurupa Valley was incorporated as a general law city effective July 1, 2011 and is governed by a five-member City Council. A municipal election is held on the first Tuesday in November on even-numbered years. Council members serve four-year terms and the Mayor is appointed annually by and from the City Council. Each December, the Council meets and chooses one of its members as Mayor and one of its members as Mayor Pro Tem. The City Council responsibilities include, but are not limited to, passing ordinances, adopting the budget, appointing committees and commissions, and hiring both the City Manager and City Attorney. The City Council meets regularly on the 1st and 3rd Thursdays of every month at 6:00 p.m. for Closed Session and at 7:00 p.m. for its Regular Session at the former Sam’s Western Wear Building, City Council Chamber, 8930 Limonite Avenue, Jurupa Valley, CA 92509. The complete City Council Agenda is posted on the website the Monday prior to the scheduled Thursday meeting. The agendas for the current/upcoming City Council meetings and the immediate past meeting agendas and minutes are also available on the website. The Planning Commission meetings are held on 2nd and 4th Wednesday of each month at 7:00 p.m. in the City Council Chambers at the former Sam’s Western Wear Building. City of Jurupa Valley MSR – Final Page 3 In order to avoid any lapses in regulatory authority, upon incorporation, a new City is required to adopt all County ordinances until it adopts its own. Among the first actions taken by the inaugural council was the adoption of the County’s general plan land use designations and zoning classifications. The City has recently started development of its own General Plan. The City’s first City Manager, Stephen Harding, recently retired. The Council has appointed Gary Thompson as Interim City Manager. The City Manager is ultimately responsible for implementing the policies and actions of the City Council. The City Manager oversees the day- to-day operations of the City as well as appointing the heads of various departments. City Hall hours of operations are Monday through Friday from 8:00 a.m. to 5:00 p.m., closing on most holidays. The five City Council members are the City’s only employees. However, they receive only a stipend rather than a salary. All other personnel are contractor personnel from private companies. Jurupa Valley City Council as of December 2014 Name Term Ending Title* Frank Johnston 2016 Council Member Brian Berkson 2018 Council Member Brad Hancock 2016 Council Member Verne Lauritzen 2018 Council Member Laura Roughton 2018 Council Member *The Mayor and Mayor Pro-Tem will be selected at the new council’s first organizational meeting in December. B. Basic Financial Information The City of Jurupa Valley adopts an annual budget. In May of this year, the City adopted its FY 14-15 Annual Budget. Most of the budgets can be found on the City’s website http://jurupavalley.org/Departments/City-Documents-and-Forms?folderId=2893. As the newest city to Riverside County, the City finds itself in a unique and unfortunate fiscal situation. The incorporation of Jurupa Valley was approved by the voters in March of 2011 with an official incorporation date of July 1, 2011. Prior to this date, cities incorporated prior to 2004 received a small population-based portion of vehicle license fee revenues (VLF) and a much larger sum of property tax in-lieu of VLF (PT-VLF). Cities incorporating in 2004 or later were entitled to a large per capita allocation of VLF (in excess of $50 per capita) to make up for PT- VLF that those newer cities did not receive. Additionally, new cities received a special VLF allocation for a period of five years. In the days before the City’s incorporation, SB 89 was passed by the Legislature and signed into law with an effective date of July 1, 2011. SB 89 shifted all VLF revenues from cities to law enforcement grants. During the first year of incorporation, FY 11-12, Jurupa Valley lost approximately $6.5 million, the fledgling city’s largest single source of revenue. In subsequent years it would have been the City’s second largest single revenue source. In each subsequent year it is estimated that the City has lost and will continue to lose approximately $5.5-6 million annually. This was revenue that was relied upon by LAFCO in its determination of fiscal feasibility and by voters to finance services provided by their new local government. Several City of Jurupa Valley MSR – Final Page 4 legislative efforts to restore these funds over the last three years have been unsuccessful, including SB 69, which passed out of the Legislature unanimously, but was recently vetoed by the Governor. SB 69 would have provided the four recently incorporated cities with property tax in-lieu of VLF in an identical fashion to all other cities in California. From FY 11-12 through FY 15-16 it is estimated that the City of Jurupa Valley will have lost approximately $28.5 to $30.6 million in VLF revenues. This has threatened the ability of the City to remain incorporated. Partially, the City has managed to stay afloat due to the postponement of payments to the County for the transition year services, six months of deferred sheriff service costs for FY 12-13, and deferred revenue neutrality payments. These outstanding obligations are discussed later in this section. General Fund: A general fund for local municipalities can be generally described as the main operating fund used to account for all general revenues that are not specifically levied or collected for other City funds, and for expenditures for general services provided by the City. Since incorporation, the City of Jurupa Valley’s General Fund has been operating at a surplus, with the exception of the current fiscal year, FY 14-15. A summary of the City’s General Fund budgets for each fiscal year since incorporation is listed below. General Fund FY 11-12 FY 12-13 FY 13-14 FY 14-15 Revenues $7,435,093 $18,204,831 $19,037,246 $19,572,000 Expenditures $3,396,663 $17,056,803 $18,594,813 $23,435,635 Surplus/Deficit $4,038,430 $1,148,028 $442,433 -$3,863,635 Sources—FY 11-12 Audit; FY 12-13: Audit; FY 13-14: Estimated Actuals from FY 14-15 Adopted Budget; FY 14-15 Adopted Budget. The budget for FY 11-12 is very small in comparison to the preceding fiscal years since it represents the City’s first year of incorporation, also referred to as the transition year whereby the County continues providing services. The transition year services are later billed to the City and payment arrangements are made. Payments to the County are scheduled to begin in FY 15-16. Total revenues have been steadily increasing for the City of Jurupa Valley between three and five percent, however, discretionary revenues have decreased slightly. Budgeted revenues for FY 14-15 are currently projected at $19,572,000. Of that amount approximately 80 percent or $15,772,298 are discretionary revenues. Provided is a breakdown of the City’s discretionary revenues since incorporation. The City’s property tax in lieu of sale tax revenues are accounted for in sales tax revenues consistent with the City’s audit statements. The estimated VLF revenue loss to the City mentioned earlier represents approximately 25 percent to 30 percent of its discretionary revenue. City of Jurupa Valley MSR – Final Page 5 Discretionary Revenues FY 11-12 FY 12-13 FY 13-14 FY 14-15 VLF Revenues $0 $0 $0 $0 Property Taxes $180,982 $4,527,745 $4,772,195 $4,845,928 Sales Taxes* $4,220,459 $9,315,580 $8,665,000 $8,710,000 Franchise Fees $1,679,411 $1,981,200 $2,263,054 $2,046,370 Transient Occupancy Tax $149,298 $171,381 $175,000 $175,000 Total $6,230,150 $15,995,906 $15,875,249 $15,777,298 Sources—FYs 11-12 & FY 12-13: Annual Audit; FY 13-14: Estimated Actuals from FY 14-15 Adopted Budget, FY 14-15 Adopted Budget. *Adjusted FY 11-12 Budget Numbers; FY 12-13 Estimated Actuals **Includes Property Tax in lieu of Sales Tax. Generally, expenditures were maintained relatively low during FYs 11-12 and 12-13, allowing the City to operate at a surplus and build a general reserve or fund balance. This was achieved by reducing sheriff services and the County deferring payments as previously mentioned. In FY 12-13, the County assisted the City by deferring 44 percent of the sheriff costs for services provided to the City. From the FY 13-14 to FY 14-15 Budget, expenditures were increased 26 percent. While services were improved, this marked the first budget to have an operating deficit. Appropriations exceed expected revenues by nearly $3.9 million. Sheriff services were increased by approximately 17 percent. This included an overall increase to the contract with the County, due to rate increases and additional deputies; four traffic enforcement officers and additional sheriff service hours to implement the City’s noise control ordinance. Jurupa Valley anticipates its sheriff services contract will continue to increase at an average of 5 percent annually due to rate increases. Expenditures were also increased to account for the preparation of the City’s first General Plan and fee studies. Increased personnel levels for administrative services, finance, and general community development, as well as a 5 percent COLA increase for existing contract staff were budgeted for in the current fiscal year. Other budgeted increases are associated with establishing a new city, such as capital improvements for the city hall’s relocation of $350,000, publishing the City’s municipal code, upgrading its business registration system, creating a human resources system, and research/marketing for economic development. Debt: The City of Jurupa Valley currently owes the County $21.1 million. Provided below is an overview of those outstanding balances and required payments. Payment for transition year costs are generally due within five years of incorporation. The County, however, has deferred start of those payments until FY 15-16 and extended the payment period to eight years. The County deferred and extended payment similarly, for a portion of sheriff services provided in FY 12-13. The combined annual payment for these services will be approximately $1.9 million. Revenue neutrality payments are required by law to mitigate the net loss of revenue to the County resulting from incorporation. Based on the revenue neutrality agreement between the County and the City, annual mitigation payments to the County will continue indefinitely. The first three years of payments totaling $6.05 million have been deferred by the County. Beginning in FY 15-16, the City will begin repayment of the deferred amount at the rate of $1.2 City of Jurupa Valley MSR – Final Page 6 million for five years. In addition, the City is required to make its agreed upon regularly scheduled revenue neutrality payments, which amount to $1.9 million annually through FY 16- 17. Subsequent revenue neutrality payments are based on a percentage of property and sales taxes generated. In FY 15-16, the current year payment and repayment of the deferred amount will total $3.11 million. Type Outstanding Annual Payments Payment Periods General Fund Transition Costs $9,060,580* $1,132,573 FY 15-16 to FY 22-23 Deferred Sheriff Cost $6,019,496 $752,437 FY 15-16 to FY 22-23 Annual Revenue Neutrality $0 $1,900,000 Indefinite** Deferred Revenue Neutrality $6,050,000 $1,210,000 FY 15-16 to FY 19-20 Total $21,130,076 $4,995,010 *Includes CPI (Net GF Transition Costs: $6,483,443). ** $1.9 mil. through FY 16-17. Afterwards Rev. Neutrality payments become a percentage of property and sales taxes. The total of all annual payments to the County for revenue neutrality and deferred service costs will be $4,995,010 beginning in FY 15-16. If all other budget elements remained constant, less one-time expenditures, the addition of these payments would increase the operating deficit in FY 15-16 to nearly $8 million. Fund Balance: The General Fund Balance acts as the city’s reserve fund. The City of Jurupa Valley has not established a specific policy on the use of reserves. During the first three years of incorporation expenditures were maintained relatively low allowing for a surplus and an increased fund balance. The beginning balance for the current fiscal year is estimated to be nearly $11 million or approximately 47 percent of the general fund appropriations. By the close of FY 14-15, it is projected to be drawn down to approximately $7.1 million. Fiscal End of Year General Increase (+) / Year (FY) Fund Balance Decrease (-) FY 11-12 $3,254,592 FY 12-13 $10,483,827 $7,229,235 FY 13-14 $10,962,035 $478,208 FY 14-15 $7,127,900 -$3,863,635 Sources—FYs 11‐12 & FY 12‐13: Annual Audit; FY 13‐14: Estimated Actuals from FY 14‐15 Adopted Budget; FY 14‐15 Adopted Budget. As noted above, payments to the County of approximately $5 million beginning next fiscal year will dramatically increase the City’s operating deficit. Even with a modest increase in revenues, the City would exhaust its fund balance, estimated to be at $7.1 million at the close of FY 14-15, by the end of next fiscal year or early FY 16-17. City of Jurupa Valley MSR – Final Page 7 Accountability: Annual audits have been performed on the financial statements of Jurupa Valley for FYs 11-12 and 12-13. FY 14-15 budgeted expenditures also include funds for property tax audit and analysis services, which is assumed to be for an annual audit of the City’s financial statements. The audits reported that the City of Jurupa Valley’s financial statements have been presented fairly. C. Population & Growth The population of Jurupa Valley as of January 1, 2014 was 97,774, as estimated by the State Department of Finance (DOF). This represents a net increase of approximately 1,100 people since incorporation. For growth forecasts, the City utilizes figures published by the County’s Center for Demographic Research (CDR) (no longer exists) and the Western Riverside Council of Governments (WRCOG), as well as information from development application filed with the City. The 2013 Riverside County Progress Report, the last one published by CDR, projects the City’s population will grow to 103,714 by 2020 and 125,950 by 2035. This represents increases of 6.1 percent and 28.8 percent, respectively, over the current DOF estimate. The Progress Report shows the rate of job growth outpacing that of population. Based on total jobs within the City of 23,300 in 2011, the number of jobs will increase by 47.6 percent and 129.5 percent by 2020 and 2035, respectively. Nearly 22 percent of jobs within the City in 2011 were in the Transportation and Warehousing sector. Retail and Manufacturing each accounted for approximately 11 percent of the jobs, followed closely by Educational Services at 10 percent. Jurupa Valley Demographic Information 2011 2012 2013 2014 2020 2035 Population 96,680 96,456 97,246 97,774 103,714 125,950 Housing Units 26,644 26,680 26,702 26,704 28,949 35,550 Employment 23,300 34,397 53,466 Source: 2013 Riverside County Progress Report, except 2014 data from State Department of Finance. IV. Services The City of Jurupa Valley provides a relatively small array of municipal and administrative services. The City has adopted a strategy of minimizing costs and retaining flexibility by contracting with public agencies, private firms or individuals to provide services. Jurupa Valley contracts with the County to provide law and traffic enforcement and animal services. The City falls within the County Library System. As a result of incorporation-related negotiations, the County also provides fire protection to much of the City population. Two Community Services Districts (CSDs), Rubidoux and Jurupa, provide many of the municipal services within the City. The two CSDs are responsible for water, wastewater and some street lighting within their respective service areas. In addition to these services, JCSD provides right of way landscaping and graffiti abatement (The City also contracts with JCSD to provide graffiti abatement in areas of the City outside the District’s boundaries). Additional City of Jurupa Valley MSR – Final Page 8 services provided by RCSD include refuse collection and fire protection within its boundaries. The Jurupa Area Recreation and Park District provides park and recreation services City-wide. A. Police Protection As noted above, the City contracts with the County for services provided by the Riverside County Sheriff’s Department and has done so since its incorporation in 2011. Within Riverside County, 17 of our 28 cities contract for services through the Sheriff’s Department. In these cities, the Sheriff’s Department acts as the Cities’ Police Department. Police protection services for Jurupa Valley are provided out of the Sheriff’s Jurupa Valley Station located at 7477 Mission Avenue. This station also serves the contract cities of Eastvale and Norco, as well as several unincorporated communities, including Coronita, El Cerrito, Home Gardens, Lake Hills and Highgrove. As of FY 2014-15, the City of Jurupa Valley contracted for the equivalent of approximately 37 patrol deputies, exclusive of supervisory, management and administrative positions and investigative staff, which are built into the contract rate for supported deputy positions. In addition to patrol services, the City contracts for the equivalent of six Traffic Enforcement officers and approximately six Special Enforcement Team (SET) deputies. SET deputies are typically assigned to target specific geographic areas or issues within a city. Jurupa Valley uses SET members as dedicated zone deputies assigned to various areas of the City. The City increased its Traffic Units from two to six as part of the 2014-15 Budget. Traffic enforcement has been a priority issue for the City. It should be noted that prior to incorporation, traffic enforcement on local roads was the responsibility of the California Highway Patrol (CHP). Although traffic enforcement on local roads in unincorporated territory is a CHP responsibility, the service is typically minimal. Therefore, the traffic enforcement provided by the City is a substantial improvement over pre-incorporation service levels. The total number of deputies currently contracted for is approximately the equivalent of the number of deputies on patrol in Jurupa Valley prior to incorporation. The City also participates in regional task forces targeting gangs and narcotics. The contract with the Sheriff also affords the City access to the Department’s regional assets, such as SWAT, Bomb Squad, and the Aviation Unit. There are no perfect metrics to evaluate law enforcement services. Common indicators for demand and service provision each have limitations. Among the data included in this MSR are calls for service, crime statistics, response times, population, number of patrols and number of deputies. The information below is presented as a reference and can be used for comparison purposes with other agencies. However, caution should be exercised when comparing data between agencies. Different jurisdictions can have quite different characteristics, making direct comparisons less meaningful. For example comparing data from a primarily suburban residential city with one that is a tourist destination or large employment center might not be particularly useful. One measure of demand is the number of calls received within the agency. Calls are presented by priority type. The higher the priority, the more urgent the need for a quick response in comparison to lower priority calls. Priority 1 calls involve circumstances that pose or very City of Jurupa Valley MSR – Final Page 9 recently posed a clearly defined threat to human life or property with the potential for serious injury. Priority 2 calls can involve circumstances of an urgent but not life threatening nature. Priority 3 calls involve circumstances of a non-emergency or past nature. Call Activity 2012 2013 Priority 1 693 710 Priority 2 11,720 12,022 Priority 3 12,715 13,013 Priority 4 7,949 7,680 Priority 1-4 calls increased by approximately one percent from 2012 to 2013, while the City’s population increased by approximately one-half percent over the same period. The combined number of Priority 1 and 2 calls, however, increased by nearly 2.6 percent, well over the population increase. Known crimes as reported to the FBI are shown below for the year 2012, the only full year of data available for Jurupa Valley. These crimes do not represent all criminal activity, only those standard offenses that are reported to the FBI for statistical purposes. These figures are useful for demonstrating trends in overall crime and specific types of offenses. Violent and Property Crimes 2012 2012 Year Population* 97,577 Total Violent Crimes 312 Murder / Manslaughter 1 Rape 12 Robbery 93 Aggravated Assault 206 Total Property Crime 3,183 Burglary 731 Theft 1,779 Auto Theft 664 Arson 9 *Population estimate used by the FBI to calculate crime rates differs slightly from DOF estimates. City of Jurupa Valley MSR – Final Page 10 The crime rate in Jurupa Valley is higher than most cities in northwest Riverside County, but lower than that of the State as a whole. The following table shows violent and property crime rates, expressed as crimes per 1,000 population, for nearby cities and the State for 2012. Crime Rate (per 1,000 population) Population* Violent Crimes Property Crimes Total Jurupa Valley 97,577 3.20 32.53 35.73 Riverside 313,529 4.43 34.50 38.93 Perris 70,616 3.40 29.47 32.87 Eastvale 55,439 .74 18.16 18.90 Corona 157,343 1.33 26.33 27.66 Norco 27,850 2.01 20.83 22.84 Moreno Valley 199,764 3.54 31.91 35.45 California 37,826,160 4.25 27.73 31.98 *Population estimate used by the FBI to calculate crime rates differs slightly from DOF estimates. A commonly used measure of service is the number of sworn personnel per 1,000 population. Based on the contract for FY 2014-15, the City will have approximately .50 deputies per 1,000 population. This is a slightly lower ratio than existed prior to incorporation (same number of deputies, larger current population). This ratio only includes contracted patrol deputies and other dedicated positions. It does not include patrol supervision, management positions or investigative staff, which are included in the Sheriff’s deputy contract rate. A more appropriate figure, particularly when comparing ratios with non-County contract cities, would be .66 sworn personnel per 1,000 population, which represents the additional prorated sworn personnel required to fully support the contracted positions. The City does not have a standard or policy objective for a sworn officer to population ratio. Staffing is based on recommendations from the Sheriff Department and practical budgetary constraints. Looking at the officer-to-population ratio alone can be misleading when making comparisons between agencies. For example, given similar officer-to-population ratios and call characteristics, an agency with a more compact service area would be expected to respond to calls quicker than in an agency with a sparsely populated rural service area. Another way of looking at coverage would be the average area per patrol. For reasons of security, the City would not disclose the specific number of deputies on each shift. The number of deputies on duty can also vary by shift and by day. However, based on the average number of patrol hours contracted per day, there would be an average of seven to eight patrol deputies in the City at any given time in addition to Special Enforcement Team (Zone Deputies) and Traffic personnel. Based on that estimate and a total area of the City of approximately 43.7 square miles, the average coverage per regular patrol is approximately 5.83 square miles. Again, this is exclusive of the other dedicated zone deputies and specialized traffic units in the field. Response times by priority type are provided below for the years 2012 and 2013. Response times increased between 2012 and 2013 disproportionate to the increase in the number of calls City of Jurupa Valley MSR – Final Page 11 received. The increase in average combined response times for Priority 1 and 2 calls was 20.3 percent. Response Times Year 2012 2013 Priority 1 5.78 7.13 Priority 2 14.33 17.22 Priority 3 29.87 35.93 Priority 4 47.18 61.31 B. Fire Protection Fire protection is not provided as a direct City service. The Rubidoux Community Services District (RCSD) provides fire protection, inclusive of medical emergency services, within its service area. The CSD contracts with the County for this service. In order to facilitate the viable incorporation of Jurupa Valley, the County agreed to retain responsibility for fire protection in those areas outside RCSD as part of the incorporation proceedings. Fire protection services are funded by a portion of the property tax dedicated to structural fire protection and County general funds in those areas outside of RCSD. The general fund money makes up the difference between the structural fire property tax and the total cost of service. Within Jurupa Valley, the general fund backfill amounts to several million dollars annually. The City does not levy any additional special taxes to support fire protection and emergency services. It does, however, collect Development Impact Fees under the previous County Ordinance, which was adopted by the City upon incorporation. One component of those fees is earmarked for future fire facilities necessitated by projected growth. Generally, as part of the County’s fire protection system (contract and direct service), units responding to an incident may be dispatched from stations either within or outside of the City. Conversely, stations located within a city can also respond to incidents in adjacent contract cities and unincorporated areas. Four fire stations are currently located within the City’s boundaries. The station number, approximate location and apparatus are shown in the table below. Like nearly all units in the County’s system, engine companies are staffed with three persons and truck (ladder) companies are staffed with four persons. All engines are staffed with paramedic personnel. Fire Protection Facilities Fire Station No. Location Equipment Station 16 9270 Limonite Ave. One 3-person Paramedic Engine One 3-person Paramedic Engine Station 17 10400 San Sevaine Way One 4-person Truck One Paramedic Squad (scheduled to be Station 18 7545 Mission Blvd. replaced by Paramedic Engine Station 38 (Rubidoux CSD) 5721 Mission Blvd. One 3-person Paramedic Engine City of Jurupa Valley MSR – Final Page 12 In addition to these stations, response may also come on a regular basis from nearby Station 27 in Eastvale. C. Park and Recreation Jurupa Area Recreation and Park District (JARPD) is responsible for parks and recreation services within the City of Jurupa Valley and the easternmost portion of Eastvale. This independent special district has served this area since 1984, many years before incorporation, and continues to do so. Jurupa Area Recreation and Park District is currently operating 19 parks and facilities, and 3 undeveloped parks and open space with a total of 297.22 acres of parkland in the entire District. The District estimates that there are 100,000 residents within its boundaries. JARPD’s adopted standard is to provide 5 acres of parkland per 1,000 residents. The District is currently operating at 2.97 acres per 1,000 residents for the District as a whole. Within the City of Jurupa Valley, the District is currently operating 15 parks and facilities, and 3 undeveloped parks and open space with a total of 295.49 acres of parkland. The District is operating at 3.02 acres per 1,000 residents, utilizing the City’s current estimated population of 97,774. The City has not adopted a separated parkland standard and relies on standards set by JARPD. In addition to JARPD facilities, the Riverside County Regional Park and Open Space District owns and operates facilities designed to be used by residents of the entire region. These facilities include two regional parks (Louis Rubidoux Nature Center and Rancho Jurupa Regional Sports Park), two aquatic facilities (Rancho Jurupa Park and The Cove water parks), an historic site (Jensen-Alvarado Historic Ranch and Museum) and a boxing club (Jurupa Valley Boxing Club) within the City. There are also five privately owned golf courses within the City (Goose Greek Golf Club, Paradise Knolls Golf Club, Indian Hills Country Club, Jurupa Hills Country Club and the Oak Quarry Golf Club.) Recreation Programs Provided by Jurupa Area Recreation and Park District • Zumba • Hip Hop Dance Class • Pretty, Pretty, Princess • Sports 4 Tykes • Summer Basketball • Tiny Tot Combo Tap and Ballet • Tot Time • Summer Break Camp • Marshmallow Design • Jewelry Making • Children's Folklorico • Ballroom Dance • Pre-Ballet & Tap Dance 1 • Pre-Ballet & Tap Dance 2 • Beginning Ballet & Tap • Youth Cooking Class City of Jurupa Valley MSR – Final Page 13 The following table shows park & recreational facilities JARPD operates within the City of Jurupa Valley: Park Name (JARPD Parks within the City of Jurupa Valley) Address Acreage Amenities 1Avalon Park - Cliff Wanamaker Gymnasium 2510 Avalon St. (92509) 10Playground, grassy area, picnic tables, ball fields, outside basketball, sand volleyball, gymnasium and restrooms. 2Agate Park - Harvey Field 8623 Jurupa Rd. (92509) 8.92n/a 3Centennial Park 7330 Jurupa Rd. (92509) 23.73n/a 4Clay Park 8029 Havenview Dr. (92509) 6.45Playground, grassy area, picnic tables, outside basketball, sand volleyball, restrooms and picnic shelters. 5Jurupa Community Center & Skate Park (District Office) 4810 Pedley Rd. (92509) 1.71Playground, community center and restrooms. 6Felspar Arena 9172 58th St. (92509) 1.5Equestrian Arena 7Glen Avon Heritage Park 7701 Mission Blvd. (92509) 11.63n/a 8Knowles Fields 5001 Poinsetta Pl. (92509) 6.41Ball Fields and restrooms. 9Laramore Park & Arena 11380 Little Dipper Street (91752) 5.18Playground, grassy area, picnic tables, equestrian and restrooms. 10Limonite Meadows Park 6596 Pat's Ranch Rd. (91752) 3.49Playground, grassy area and picnic tables. 11Rancho Mira Loma Park Rouselle Dr. & Wysocki Ln. (91752) 6.41Playground, grassy area, picnic tables, sand volleyball and picnic shelter. 12Rick Thompson Arena 8629 Jurupa Rd. (92509) 2.55n/a 13Vernola Park 5211 Wineville Ave., (91752) 20.98n/a 14Veteran's Memorial Park Community Center/Pool 4389 Riverview Dr. (92509) 10.24Playground, grassy area, picnic tables, ball fields, outside basketball, community center, pool, restooms and picnic shelter. 15Wineville Park 5551 Trail Canyon Dr. (91752) 4.89Playground, grassy area and picnic tables. 124.09 Undeveloped Parks 1Horseshoe Lake Park 8788 Lakeview (92509) 13.73Open Space - Undeveloped 2Jurupa Mountains Park 1.4 miles N of N/W corner of Patriot HS 20 3Jurupa Mountains Park #2 East of Stringfellow 137.67 171.4 Total JAPRD Park Acreage 295.49 Local governments in California provide a critical role in the effort to set aside parkland and open space for recreational purposes. The Quimby Act (California Government Code §66477) was passed in 1975. Cities and counties have been authorized to pass ordinances requiring that developers set aside land, donate conservation easements, or pay fees for park improvements. Revenues generated through the Quimby Act cannot be used for the operation and maintenance of park facilities. The requirement is three acres of land per one thousand people calculated by multiplying the number of dwelling units times the average density per dwelling unit in each municipal boundary according to the latest U.S. Census. In‐lieu fees are based on the fair market value of land within a subdivision. Development impact fees are one‐ time charges imposed on development projects to recover capital costs for public facilities needed to serve those new developments and the additional residents, employees, and visitors they bring to the community. California law, with a few minor exceptions, prohibits the use of impact fees for ongoing maintenance or operations costs. New development proposals in Jurupa Valley are required to dedicate land, pay in-lieu fees, or both, directly to JARPD in accord with the Quimby Act and must show the City proof of payment City of Jurupa Valley MSR – Final Page 14 to obtain a permit. Development proposals are sent to JARPD for review and input on servicing aspects as related to the proposed development. D. Water & Wastewater The City of Jurupa Valley does not provide water services within its boundaries. Water services are provided by Jurupa Community Services District (JCSD), Rubidoux Community Services District (RCSD), the Santa Ana River Water Company (SARWC), and West Valley Water District (WVWD). Jurupa Community Services District provides potable and non-potable water services to the bulk of the City’s residents, or an estimated 63,000 individuals of the City’s estimated 97,272 population. The entire service area of the District encompasses the Cities of Jurupa Valley and Eastvale, serving a total estimated population of 107,000. The District’s water system consists of 16 wells, 7 booster stations, 17 reservoirs and nearly 58 million gallons of storage capacity. The majority of water supply, currently 62 percent comes from local groundwater sources. JCSD also purchases 35 percent of its water supply from the Chino Basin Desalter Authority (CDA) and 3 percent is purchased from RCSD. Rubidoux Community Services District provides water services to the general area north of the Santa Ana River, southwest of the San Bernardino County line, easterly of Camino Real. The District boundaries correspond with the community of Rubidoux, mostly within the boundaries of Jurupa Valley, with the exception of a small portion that extends into the County of San Bernardino. The service population of RCSD is estimated at slightly over 27,000. RCSD’s potable water system has a daily capacity of approximately 6.4 million gallons. RCSD has approximately 65 miles of pipeline, 10 active production wells (6 potable water and 4 non- potable water) 4 storage reservoirs and 2 booster stations. Its water supply consists solely of groundwater extracted from the Riverside-Arlington Subbasin of the Upper Santa Ana Groundwater Basin. The Santa Ana River Water Company is a mutual water company whose boundaries are entirely within the City of Jurupa Valley. The area served by the SARWC consists of a population of 8,080 generally identified as Mira Loma. The water system is small in comparison to the other retail service providers within the City consisting of 2,042 service connections. There is little information regarding the mutual water company since it is not a public agency. West Valley Water District serves three noncontiguous areas consisting of approximately 310 acres within the City of Jurupa generally described as Crestmore Heights. The boundaries of within Riverside County can be generally described as being south of the Riverside/San Bernardino County boundary line, west of Brown Ave, north of Wilson St., and east of Armstrong Rd. Its Riverside County customers are a small portion of its service area since the District primarily serves the general unincorporated area of Bloomington in San Bernardino County. WVWD’s service area in Riverside County currently overlaps the boundaries of Rubidoux Community Services District. While WVWD provides water services to Crestmore Heights, RCSD provides other services such as wastewater services, street lighting, trash collection via contract, and fire protection services. City of Jurupa Valley MSR – Final Page 15 Also, due to the rural nature of some of the areas within Jurupa Valley, domestic water is provided by on-site wells and not any of the above-mentioned water systems. Whether the City of Jurupa Valley remains incorporated or the affected area reverts back to the County’s jurisdiction, water services will continue to be provided as they are currently provided. Disincorporation would not change these services since they are not directly provided by the City of Jurupa Valley. Currently, any maintenance work required in public rights of way is coordinated with the City for traffic mitigation purposes. Nonetheless, development proposals processed by the City are sent to the affected water agencies for review and comments for the future provision of water services. Sewer service within the City of Jurupa Valley is provided by Jurupa Community Services District and Rubidoux Community Services District. Due to proximity or elevation issues some of the large rural development lots are not connected to a public wastewater system. Instead, these dwellings utilize on-site septic systems. Again, JCSD provides the majority of service within the City, consisting of approximately 63,000 residents. Within the service area of JCSD, wastewater collected within Jurupa Valley is treated at the City of Riverside Regional Water Quality Control Plant, the Western Riverside County Regional Wastewater Treatment Plant and the Orange County Sanitation District (OCSD). The City of Riverside, JCSD, RCSD and Edgemont Community Services District have entered into various agreements for regional sewage treatment at the City of Riverside’s Treatment Plant. JCSD discharges approximately 3.2 million gallons per day (mgd) to the Riverside Plant. The Western Riverside County Regional Wastewater Treatment Plant, currently managed by Western Municipal Water District through the Western Riverside County Regional Wastewater Authority (WRCRWA), a joint powers authority (JPA), also treats effluent collected by JCSD. The JPA members consist of the Cities of Norco and Corona, JCSD, Western Municipal Water District (WMWD), and the Home Gardens Sanitary District (HGSD). The regional treatment plant has a current capacity of 8.0 mgd with an expansion capacity of 14 mgd. JCSD currently discharges approximately 3.4 mgd to the WRCRWA Plant, of which approximately 0.1 mgd originates within the City of Jurupa Valley. The OCSD treats approximately 2 mgd of industrial and brine wastewater from the JCSD service area that is discharged into the Inland Empire Brine Line, which is owned by the Santa Ana Watershed Project Authority (SAWPA). The total wastewater treatment flows from the City of Jurupa Valley into the JCSD service area is 5.3 mgd. Rubidoux Community Services District delivers 2.0 mgd to the City of Riverside Regional Water Quality Control Plant. Approximately 27,000 residents are served by RCSD. Again, wastewater services would remain the same should Jurupa Valley disincorporate. Currently, the City coordinates traffic mitigation for maintenance work in the public right of way with the sewer service provider. Development proposals being processed by the City are sent to the agencies for review and input on any service impacts as well. City of Jurupa Valley MSR – Final Page 16 E. Road Maintenance The City currently has two dedicated road maintenance crews that provide daily minor maintenance such as pothole repairs and right of way cleanup. Additionally, contracted maintenance for major road maintenance such as slurry/chip seal and overlays/striping are performed per the City’s Master Road Maintenance Plan. In October 2014, the City adopted a Capital Improvement Program (CIP) plan for street improvements for FY 14-15. The improvement budget is $5,799,800. The plan is to deliver numerous smaller projects and contribute to some larger projects as a participant with other agencies. The funding will come from Gas Tax, Measure A, eligible TUMF (Transportation Uniform Mitigation Fee), and RCTC (Riverside County Transportation Commission) funding for regional improvement within the City and grant funding when available. The City has identified a large number of deteriorated streets within the City, mostly residential areas that were given a rating of “Failed to Very Poor” to describe the condition of the City’s pavement. The attached Pavement Condition Map depicts road conditions City-wide. Prioritization of major road maintenance is a function of need based on pavement index criteria, and funding availability. The following are selected projects from the City’s CIP that includes both projects the City is participating in with Riverside County and the City of Riverside and smaller local projects undertaken by the City. Name of Project Estimated Cost Status Market St. Improvement & Traffic Signal at Agua Mansa, Rubidoux Blvd. to Agua Mansa (County lead project) $350,000 In Progress Market St. Bridge, Crossing Santa Ana River (County lead project, City of Riverside and Jurupa Valley) $52,000 In Progress Mission Blvd. Bridge (County lead project, City of Riverside and Jurupa Valley) $52,000 In Progress Pavement Rehab, Various Streets $2,150,000 In Progress 2013/14 Pavement Rehab, Various Streets $800,000 In Progress 2014/15 F. Street Lighting Within the City, street lighting is provided by the Jurupa and Rubidoux CSDs as well as the City. The City assumed street lighting from two entities upon incorporation. As a result of the concurrent dissolution of County Service Areas (CSA) 72 and 73, the City assumed streetlighting provided by the two CSAs in a very limited part of the City. The City receives a small portion of the property taxes previously accruing to the CSAs. The City also assumed the functions and revenues of the portions of the County’s Landscape and Lighting Maintenance District (LLMD) 89-1-C that were within the incorporation boundaries. Landscape and Lighting City of Jurupa Valley MSR – Final Page 17 Maintenance District (LLMD) 89-1-C levies assessments for lighting and landscaping improvements, maintenance and arterial street lighting. The City contracts with the County for the administration of the LLMD and the services it funds. The City’s website provides a link to report street light outages. The link opens a Southern California Edison (SCE) outage reporting form. No such links could be found on either CSD’s website. All street light outages in Jurupa Valley are ultimately reported to SCE for resolution. G. Street Sweeping The City reports that street sweeping services are being performed by a solid waste franchise contractor through their franchise agreements. Street sweeping services are provided twice a month. H. Solid Waste Currently two waste haulers provide trash collection services within Jurupa Valley. Rubidoux Community Services District (RCSD) contracts with Burrtec Waste Industries for trash collection within the boundaries of the District. This is not a franchise agreement. The City of Jurupa Valley has franchise agreements with Burrtec and Waste Management, Inc. These two franchises cover the central and western portions of the City, respectively, that are outside of RCSD. As of FY 13-14, actual solid waste franchise fees received by the City were $747, 275, or about 4 percent of the General Fund revenues. The current year budgeted for $500,275 in franchise fees, accounting for 2.5 percent of the General Fund revenues. I. Library Service The Riverside County Library System (RCLS) provides library services within the City of Jurupa Valley. Currently, there are two County library branches within the City. The Glen Avon Regional Library is located at 9244 Galena Street, Jurupa Valley, CA 92509 and is staffed by two full-time and seven part-time employees. The Library is open an average of 42 hours per week closing Fridays and Sundays. The square footage of the facility is approximately 22,000 square feet. There are approximately 44,232 volumes held within the branch. There are various activities hosted at this site including weekly story time, monthly family story times, monthly movie programs, special quarterly programs and monthly Friends of the Library book sales. The Louis Rubidoux Library is located at 5840 Mission Boulevard, Jurupa Valley, CA 92509 and is staffed by five full-time and eight part-time employees. The Library is open an average of 52 hours per week, seven days a week. The square footage of the facility is approximately 20,000 square feet and there are approximately 62,318 volumes held within the branch. There are various activities hosted at this site including Crochet Club, computer classes, movie showings, craft programs, story time and children’s movie showings. City of Jurupa Valley MSR – Final Page 18 J. Animal Control The City contracts with the County of Riverside for animal control and shelter services. One of the County’s shelter facilities is located in the City at 6851 Van Buren Blvd. Services provided out of the animal shelter include housing for small and large animals such as horses, adoption services, spay/neuter services, and veterinary services. The City’s current contract with the County allows for two full-time field officers, 1.5 full-time license inspectors and full shelter services from the Jurupa facility. The charges for services charged to the unincorporated county areas are extended to city residents. Additionally, animal licenses are available for single and multiple years, the latter at a discounted rate. Currently, the City policy allows for a maximum of four dogs and four cats per household. Should the number of dogs or cats within one household exceed that amount, a kennel permit would be required. City of Jurupa Valley Type of License 1 Year 2 Year 3 Year Late Fee* Altered Dogs $16 $25 $35 $25 Unaltered Dogs $100 $175 $225 $25 Altered Dog, owned by Senior Citizen 60+ $10 $15 $20 $15 Source: Riverside County Department of Animal Services. K. Disadvantaged Unincorporated Communities SB 244, which addressed disadvantaged unincorporated communities (DUCs), became effective January 1, 2012. A DUC is generally defined as inhabited territory with an annual median household income (MHI) that is less than 80 percent of the statewide median household income. Several provisions of SB 244 impact annexation proposals and studies performed by LAFCOs. As it relates to MSRs, the Commission is required to prepare specific written determinations on infrastructure needs or deficiencies related to sewer, water, and fire protection services in any DUC(s) within or contiguous to the sphere of influence of a city or special district that provides those services. Using data from the latest 2008-2012 dataset by the Census American Community Survey, the MHI is $61,400. Eighty percent of that figure is $49,120. In the case of Jurupa Valley, there is no inhabited unincorporated territory adjacent to the City. With the exception of the Santa Ana River bottom, the City is surrounded by the incorporated cities of Riverside, Eastvale and Norco and the County boundary. As such, there are no DUCs in the vicinity of the City. V. Sphere of Influence As noted previously, with the exception of a few unincorporated areas within the Santa Ana River, the City is surrounded by the County boundary and the Cities of Riverside, Eastvale and City of Jurupa Valley MSR – Final Page 19 Norco. The City of Riverside previously expressed interest in the River territory, since it performs some trail maintenance in those areas. Practical options for the Commission to consider when it reviews the City’s SOI will be either a coterminous sphere, indicating the current boundaries should be the ultimate configuration of the City, or a “zero” sphere, indicating that a future disincorporation is appropriate. Review of the City’s SOI will not be scheduled until spring or summer of 2015. This will provide the City an opportunity to explore any remaining avenues to improve its grim financial position. VI. Determinations (1) Growth and population projections for the affected area. The City acknowledges the use of growth projections developed by the County and WRCOG. These projections indicate the City will experience substantial growth over the next 20 years, including expansion of employment opportunities. Past estimates and projections for 2020 and 2035 are shown below. Jurupa Valley Demographic Information 2011 2012 2013 2014 2020 2035 Population 96,680 96,456 97,246 97,774 103,714 125,950 Housing Units 26,644 26,680 26,702 26,704 28,949 35,550 Employment 23,300 34,397 53,466 Source: 2013 Riverside County Progress Report, except 2014 data from State Department of Finance. (2) Disadvantaged Unincorporated Communities (DUCs) Characteristics. There is no inhabited unincorporated territory adjacent to the City. With the exception of the Santa Ana River bottom, the City is surrounded by incorporated cities and the County boundary. Therefore, there are no DUCs relevant to this analysis. (3) Present and planned capacity of public facilities and adequacy of public services, including infrastructure needs or deficiencies including needs or deficiencies related to sewers, municipal and industrial water, and structural fire protection in any DUC within or contiguous to the sphere of influence. The City has acknowledged the need for increased law enforcement. It has increased the number of deputies to approximately what was provided pre-incorporation, however, these resources are now also responsible for traffic enforcement. The ability of the City to increase law enforcement services will be limited by lack of revenue. The City has also indicated that there are a large number of lane miles in poor or very poor condition. The City adopts an annual plan to address road repairs and improvements, but a long-term plan has not yet been developed. (4) Financial ability of agencies to provide services. The loss of vehicle license fee revenue upon incorporation represented a severe setback to the City. The County has assisted the City during these early years by deferring revenue neutrality payments and charges for services provided. The repeated failure of the State to restore the revenue threatens not only the ability to increase or even maintain service levels, but the continued existence of the City. City of Jurupa Valley MSR – Final Page 20 (5) Status of, and opportunities for, shared facilities. The City provides a minimal array of municipal services, reducing the likelihood of overlapping responsibilities. Many services are provided by special districts that overlie the City. All services are provided via contract with the County or private vendors, allowing flexibility without excess unused staff capacity. One area where overlapping responsibilities do exist is street lighting. The City and the Rubidoux and Jurupa CSDs all provide street lighting service. However, since Southern California Edison ultimately performs all maintenance, there is no significant duplication of effort. (6) Accountability for community service needs, including governmental structure and operational efficiencies. As a fairly new City, the City of Jurupa Valley has completed two Comprehensive Annual Financial Reports (CAFR) for FYs 2011-12 and 2012-13. The CAFR includes the Independent Auditor’s Report. Financial documents are informative and readable. The City’s Budget Documents for FYs 2011-12 and 2013-14 are available under Financial Services/Budget Documents on the City’s website. Other budget documents are available upon request. An abundance of other documents from every area of City government is readily available on the website, including a variety of applications and other forms. The website also includes a calendar of events, news articles and information as it relates to Jurupa Valley, and public meeting information, including agendas for meetings of the Council and City Commissions. Planning Commission agendas and minutes are only available for the current year and not prior years. Various commissions and committees offer opportunities for public participation in the City decision-making process. (7) Any other matter related to effective or efficient service delivery, as required by Commission policy. No additional determinations are required at this time. City of Jurupa Valley MSR – Final Page 21