Costa Mesa dips into ‘CAN' to fill $2.9M budget gap, next year could be worse
To fill a financial shortfall, caused by a slowdown in sales tax receipts, Costa Mesa officials Tuesday approved deferring $2.9 million in public works projects that were included in the the city's 2024-25 budget.
Using the funds earmarked for such projects brings the city out of compliance with a local capital asset needs ordinance also known as the CAN, passed in 2015, which mandates 5% of the city's general fund revenue be set aside to pay for capital improvements.
The CAN ordinance includes an exemption for 'economic downturn, natural disaster, emergency or other unforeseen circumstances,' which the Costa Mesa City Council exercised in a regular meeting Tuesday.
Officials agreed to operate below the 5% threshold to square away $2.9 million remaining from a $3.6 million 2024-25 budget gap and to pay back 'the CAN' over the next five years by building repayments into future budget plans.
But as an even worse economic forecast looms in the foreseeable future — with Costa Mesa finance staff projecting a possible $6.5-million gap between revenue and expenditures in the coming fiscal year — those who helped craft the law warn such waivers set a 'dangerous precedent' for the city's finances.
Talk in council chambers Tuesday largely focused on which improvement projects would be cut, staff having already recommended authorizing the CAN's 'Emergency Exception' clause.
City staff initially put forth a list of 10 projects that could be deferred, amounting to a collective $2,872,776 in savings, including several building and infrastructure upgrades at City Hall, a $450,000 west side restoration project, a butterfly garden and a $400,000 modernization of the Costa Mesa Country Club.
Two other alternatives featured edits offered by the city's Finance and Pension Advisory Committee (FiPAC) — which spared City Hall heating and air handler upgrades but put proposed senior center and sewer line improvements ($250,000 apiece) on the chopping block — and a modification proposed during an April 22 council study session.
Public Works Director Raja Sethuraman said even with the deferrals, this year's list of projects was more than enough to keep department staff busy.
'With the requested deferral of approximately $2.9 million we'll still have 96 projects in our capital improvement projects, with $90 million in projects to be implemented over the next two to three years,' he told the council Tuesday.
While the action taken by the council sews up an immediate fiscal hole, questions still linger about what could happen to the CAN fund next year as an even more protracted slowing down in revenue is projected.
Former Costa Mesa councilmembers and mayors Steve Mensinger and Jim Righeimer issued warnings about dipping into the CAN in a letter addressed to the council and submitted it as a public comment at Tuesday's meeting.
They said the ordinance specifies the capital fund set aside can only be canceled by a declared fiscal emergency.
'What's happening today doesn't follow that legal path,' the pair wrote. 'Instead, the council is trying to reframe a raid on the CAN fund as a 'budget adjustment' or a technical allocation change. That's not honest.
'If you're reaching into the savings account, just say it: you're declaring an emergency. Because by law, that's the only time you're allowed to do this.'
Neither Righeimer nor Mesinger appeared at Tuesday's meeting. But Mayor John Stephens challenged their interpretation of the ordinance.
'We don't need to declare an economic emergency, we just need to declare that there's an economic downturn, which I think there clearly is,' he said. '[And] the language of the CAN ordinance is not entirely clear it has to be an unforeseen economic downturn.'
In addition to proposing the $2.9-million withdrawal be replenished via budgeted payments, Stephens asked staff working on the 2025-26 operating budget to be on the lookout for cost-saving solutions — including using reserve funds, eliminating job vacancies, cutting consultant contracts and a possible repeal of the ordinance.
'We need to be very creative there,' the mayor said. 'That includes putting the CAN ordinance on the table for repealing or amending, and it includes using reserves we've built up and all the other items I mentioned.'
Hashtags
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
San Francisco Chronicle
11 hours ago
- San Francisco Chronicle
Mayor Lurie made ‘painful' cuts in his S.F. budget proposal. The hurt is far from over
San Francisco Mayor Daniel Lurie said he made 'painful decisions' when assembling his recent budget proposal that would slash nonprofit contracts and shrink the City Hall workforce. But the hurt is far from over. Lurie recently told the Chronicle that he is still eyeing a more ambitious overhaul next year as he tries to erase a deficit that's projected to reach as much as $700 million in the 2028 fiscal year. Complicating Lurie's plans to rein in city spending is the fact that the Trump administration has already moved to claw back federal funds from San Francisco and could try to take more money away. And a Tuesday report from the city controller's office warned that proposed Medicaid cuts advanced by Congressional Republicans could further hurt city revenue — as could a potential recession. Lurie's city spending plan would eliminate about $185 million in grants and contracts over two years and cut about 100 filled jobs from the government payroll. The proposal would help Lurie close a massive budget shortfall, but unions and nonprofits quickly decried what they view as an unwarranted assault on community groups that provide crucial services to residents and businesses. Despite the early resistance, however, Lurie's inaugural budget blueprint does not represent a massive reorganization of the San Francisco bureaucracy, nor does it compare to the layoffs the city last experienced during the Great Recession. Next year could be a different story. In an interview with the Chronicle last week, Lurie indicated that he sees the current budget negotiations as a prelude to his plans for 2026. This year, his budget proposal was all about 'right-sizing,' he said. For next year, he has a different word in mind: 'restructuring.' 'This was a really focused budget on delivering core services (and) right-sizing our government,' Lurie said. 'And it does not mean the work is over. It was never going to be that way. … We have a lot of work to do ahead of us.' It's not yet clear what Lurie's promised restructuring will look like. The mayor's budget plan this year already proposed combining two city departments beset by scandals into one agency. And a February executive directive that Lurie issued on permitting reform said the city should explore how it might merge 'key permitting functions' into one department. Just how difficult Lurie's budget calculus will be in the coming year depends heavily on what happens at the national level. San Francisco's nearly $16 billion budget relies on more than $2 billion in operating revenue from the federal government, the vast majority of which comes in the form of Medicaid reimbursements. Funding changes under consideration in Congress could hurt the city, but it's how much it might lose. The controller's Tuesday report said the proposed federal budget bill 'represents the biggest set of cuts to Medicaid since inception and could result in thousands of San Francisco residents disenrolling from the Medi-Cal program and reduced funding for the Department of Public Health.' Lurie has proposed setting up a $400 million reserve that the city could tap into to offset any major funding cuts from President Trump or Congress. The controller found that the reserve amount was 'commensurate to risk.' Another unknown is the extent to which any national economic downturn could harm San Francisco's budget, and Lurie's ability to bring city spending in line with revenue. The controller's report noted that, while unemployment in the city is stable and office attendance has risen, technology and hospitality companies continue to lay people off. Trump's tariffs and immigration crackdowns could further strain the economy. Regardless of what happens nationally, Lurie has said he is already trying to end 'the era of soaring city budgets' and wants city officials to 'start living within our means.' His proposed cuts represent a reckoning for nonprofits after years of flush city budgets that saw millions flow to third parties in exchange for providing crucial social services. Now, many of those organizations are reeling from deep cuts that could force layoffs and the shuttering of programs. Some San Francisco legal aid organizations are facing deep cuts that they say could lead to more homelessness and less access to legal services for the needy. One legal aid organization's director is going on a hunger strike to protest the cuts. The Latino Task Force, Housing Rights Committee of San Francisco, the Chinatown Community Development Center and dozens of others are facing cuts that will impact services. The People's Budget, a coalition of city advocacy groups that every year proposes changes to the mayor's budget, has a 'walkthrough' of all the groups they have heard from that are losing funding. Anya Worley-Ziegmann, lead coordinator for the San Francisco People's Budget Coalition that advocates for nonprofits facing cuts, said in a statement that Lurie's budget proposal threatens 'essential services for food security, workforce development, legal aid, and children and families facing homelessness.' 'We cannot balance the budget on the backs of working class and marginalized communities while at the same time claiming to be a city that cares for all its residents,' Worley-Ziegmann said. Lurie also is being slammed by fiscal conservatives who believe he should have made deeper cuts to the city's 33,000-person workforce and take on the city's 'nonprofit industrial complex,' a moniker critics have given to the large contractors that do work on behalf of the city. A previous Chronicle analysis found that San Francisco has an unusually high amount of public sector workers per capita, especially among public health and library employees. Marie Hurabiell, founder of the neighborhood advocacy group Connected SF, praised Lurie for taking on the city's nonprofits and contractors as well as his effort to 'right-size' the budget after years of what she said was 'overspending' related to the pandemic. But she said those changes will only get San Francisco to the level of spending it had before COVID, and there are many more cuts to be made to downsize the government so it better reflects the city's relatively small population. One way to do that is by doubling down on accountability, she said. 'For years there's been a lot of money flowing and our services have not been great,' she said. '(Lurie) is probably trying to be very thoughtful and methodical (about future cuts), but I'm hoping he will be more impactful.' The existing job cuts in Lurie's proposed budget also drew some criticism from the executive committee of the San Francisco Democratic Party, which is controlled by moderates who generally share Lurie's politics. Committee members said in a statement that Lurie's budget overall 'demonstrates bold leadership during a time of unprecedented fiscal challenge.' But party leaders said they were 'very concerned about the proposed reduction of city jobs currently held by San Francisco employees.' 'Cutting these roles not only disrupts lives and livelihoods but also risks weakening the long-term capacity of government to meet the needs of its residents,' the statement read. Party chair Nancy Tung said the committee doesn't have a position on where budget cuts should come from if those 100 jobs were preserved. But she said the committee hoped Lurie and supervisors would be able to find a way to prevent any city employees from being laid off. She also acknowledged that the city's financial condition had put Lurie in a tough spot and praised him for issuing a hiring slowdown on his first day in office. 'I don't envy where the mayor is in terms of having to do this,' Tung said. 'I also know that this is very hard for him, too. He is trying to do it as humanely as possible.' Tom Li contributed reporting.
New York Post
20 hours ago
- New York Post
Michael Goodwin: Dems agree NYC is too expensive — and voters can't afford them being in charge
If there is a single point of agreement among all the Democrats running for mayor, it's that New York is too damn expensive. They uniformly call it an 'affordability crisis' and pledge to do something about it if elected. They are largely correct — the cost of living in New York has become absurdly high. Advertisement Although part of the trend grew out of the inflation sparked by massive spending by federal, state and local governments during the COVID era, there is also a long history of Gotham being one of most expensive places in the nation to live. A study shows that, in comparison to the national average, food prices in the five boroughs are about 22% higher, while housing is 278% more expensive. Making ends meet The United Way finds that basic costs for city households have risen twice as fast as the median income and estimates that about half of them need help from the government, friends or family just to make ends meet. Advertisement As Queens Assemblyman Zohran Mamdani recently told The New York Times, 'There are far too many New Yorkers who do not know if they will be able to call themselves that next year, who do not know if they will be able to afford their rent, or their child care, their groceries, or even their MetroCard.' True to his socialist affiliations, Mamdani is promising the longest list of freebies, but his rivals have all joined the spree. Even Andrew Cuomo, often regarded as the most centrist of the bunch and the leader according to polls, is no shrinking violet in the giveaway games. The candidates' promises to address the problem sound very nice — until you realize that nearly everything they are offering would ultimately drive the sky-high cost of living even higher. Advertisement Already that burden is one of the top reasons why New York City and state lead America in losing residents to lower-cost jurisdictions. Congestion pricing is the latest example of how and why the cost of living here keeps rising. If the candidates all want to raise prices even higher, they should support a joint slogan: 'Dear Voters, If you're not broke yet, just wait.' The problem is that government compassion doesn't come cheap. Advertisement In fact, it's outrageously expensive. That's certainly true in the case at hand. The candidates' 'solutions' are just promises to give away more stuff to more people, such as free bus service, free child care, free this and free that. It's all wrapped in the language of compassion for the poor and working class. But what the lefty Dems leave out of the conversation is an honest explanation about where the money would come from to pay for all their added goodies, and what the impact would be of an expanded redistribution scheme to deliver them. Don't be fooled by the lack of details. That's intentional because the numbers would be frightening. Take away to give away But hiding the truth doesn't change the fact that because City Hall can't print money, it will first have to take more from residents and businesses if it is going to give away more. Advertisement Consider the obvious impact on businesses. If they are taxed more, most will make up for it by raising prices on their customers, cut the pay of their workers or reduce the number of workers. When a business goes broke, the city gets no taxes and the workers have no income. Because higher taxes always impose a trickle-down cost on some people, a similar outcome is true if the government raises income taxes on individuals, sales taxes or property taxes. Advertisement Somebody somewhere along the line is going to feel the pinch of every added dollar the city takes to give away to someone it declares more deserving. For those forced to pay more, the 'solution' to the problem means their cost of living is going to get even higher. That's why the candidates' plans need to be seen in light of the current budget. As it stands, City Hall will raise and spend a whopping $112.4 billion this year — nearly as much as the entire state of Florida. Advertisement New York state, meanwhile, will raise and spend $255 billion, with much of that money coming to the city. Additional agencies, such as the MTA, have their own budgets, which spend tens of billions more. Clearly the problem isn't a shortage of money to spend. Advertisement The problem is a shortage of responsible spending. Thus raising spending for 'new needs,' as the politicians call their freebies, by hiking taxes and fees at this point is almost certain to create as many problems as it solves. There is still time for the Dems to lay out a plan to actually reduce government costs. The first debate was little more than a bidding game to see who could promise more new giveaways and most vehemently denounce Donald Trump while pledging to 'resist' his presidency. The second and final mayoral debate, required by the NYC Campaign Finance Board, will take place Thursday, with primary day falling on June 24. It's incumbent on the moderators to demand that Mamdani and all the others explain, with specifics, where they would get added funds and who would pay them. Glib lines like taxing the 'top 1%' mean nothing because those families already pay inordinate amounts of the city's personal income tax. According to a city comptroller report, in 2021 the top 1% — about 6,000 families who reported incomes of $1 million or more — paid a whopping 48% of the city's total income tax haul. It's neither fair nor sensible to demand they pay more, when packing up and leaving altogether is proving to be so popular. Leftward lurch Unfortunately, we haven't heard much of a different message from other candidates in the race, including Mayor Adams, who is running as an independent. With GOP candidate Curtis Sliwa widely considered not viable, there is so far no check and balance on the Dems' leftward lurch. The vast majority of their spendthrift City Council candidates and those seeking other offices on the ballot are proving to be automatic supporters of larger and more expensive programs. National conversations about cutting taxes and reducing government waste, fraud and abuse have yet to find meaningful support in New York. That must start to change this week. Libs' stupidity taking a toll There they go again: Another major media outlet is confusing victimhood with the consequences of wrongdoing. The bleeding heart Boston Globe writes, 'Unpaid fees jeopardize thousands of Mass. driver's licenses,' saying, 'Thousands of Massachusetts drivers each year face the possibility of losing their legal authority to drive unless debts unrelated to road safety are paid in full.' Among the debts it cites are tolls the drivers evaded. Here's a crazy idea: The drivers could pay the tolls and keep their licenses. Why is that so hard?
Yahoo
20 hours ago
- Yahoo
City says restoration of historic Providence City Hall will cost $40 million
PROVIDENCE, R.I. (WPRI) — The first phase of $40 million in restoration work at Providence City Hall is slated to get underway next spring. Renovations to the building's exterior, which will include repairing the dome, the front two roof pavilions and masonry in that area, will cost $10 million in total, according to city spokesperson Samara Pinto. Pinto said the work will be funded through the Providence Building Authority Bond as part of the city's Capital Improvement Plan. On Monday, the Downtown Design Review Committee heard from DBVW Architects, which completed a building condition assessment on City Hall last October. Project manager Benjamin Lueck said the assessment was limited to the exterior enclosure and related water infiltration. 'First and foremost, the roofing materials are deteriorated and failed throughout. In some cases, these are original materials dating back to the 1870s,' Lueck said. 'Our report also addressed the fact that, really, all of the exterior masonry joints are also failed. In some cases, large areas of masonry joints, mortar joints, are just completely open.' Lueck said the 'most significant issue' was the building's internal roof drainage. He added that the building's conditions were 'widespread' and said that 'no specific areas that are in worse condition than other areas.' 'With that in mind, our recommendation to the city is to pursue a really holistic restoration strategy,' Lueck said. He said the goal was to make sure the building was 'weather-tight' as well as 'historically accurate.' Lueck acknowledged the building has undergone restoration work over the years, but has not had any work done since 1979. 'Nowhere on the building are you seeing exactly the original construction,' Lueck explained. 'We're trying to get as close as we can to what has been the appearance of the building for the past 100 years with the acknowledgement that it will require a little bit of … slight changes to the overall detail.' Lueck said he'd recommend removing the copper cladding and preparing the original cast iron surfaces integrated into the roof with new waterproofing. Once that's done, Lueck said new decorative copper cladding would be installed to replicate the old cast iron. Lueck told the committee that DBVW hopes to have its construction drawings complete by December in advance of the proposed bidding process in January. Construction could start as soon as March or April of 2026, he said. The rest of the proposed restoration work at City Hall could take up to five years, but Pinto said the timeline may vary due to other factors like 'project costs, supply chain and potential disruptions.' 'This restoration will return the building's exterior to a standard of quality not seen in decades, while finally addressing longstanding issues like water infiltration and the deterioration of decorative metal elements that have impacted the structure for much of its existence,' Pinto added. Pinto said future phases of work to City Hall's exterior include restoring the remaining roof systems, masonry repairs, improving the building's rainwater removal systems, and replacing the windows to improve energy efficiency, 'all while maintaining the building's historic character.' The work is expected to cost $40 million in total, according to Pinto. Alexandra Leslie (aleslie@ is a Target 12 investigative reporter covering Providence and more for 12 News. Connect with her on Twitter and on Facebook. Download the and apps to get breaking news and weather alerts. Watch or with the new . Follow us on social media: Close Thanks for signing up! Watch for us in your inbox. Subscribe Now Copyright 2025 Nexstar Media, Inc. All rights reserved. This material may not be published, broadcast, rewritten, or redistributed.
