“MICHAEL KEMPS (incumbent)
”Neglect of capital assets as a means of survival and cash flow management has increased long-term liability. The Council needs first to understand likely costs associated with repair or replacement of these assets, when their useful life is complete, and the ability to continue to utilize them beyond this period without unreasonable risk. A funding strategy needs to be developed to provide for repair and/or replacement of specific assets. This will ensure that residents are not unreasonably surprised with a large multi-million-dollar expense.

The ability of the city to replace assets such as sewers or its City Hall building over a reasonable useful life is critical. A go-forward plan to repair potential seismic risks, degradation, and/or to fund eventual replacement needs to be reviewed now. Those who are for whatever reason fearful of receiving information, recommendations, or proposals are continuing to delay the inevitable. This causes undue risk which must be considered and alleviated.

A blended plan to address infrastructure, balanced with reducing pension debt and funding current needs must be included in the overall long-term financial plan. Resulting proposed changes to revenue options, whether taxable or non must allow the city to return to its previous practice of setting aside capital funds annually for repair and replacement. Then, a phased plan can be executed, or a large capital expense be planned for a future date, using savings rather than debt.””

“VICTORIA LOZZI (incumbent)
”Certainly a timely topic, and one not unique to PVE, is the concept of pay-as-you-go for deferred maintenance and capital spending. As budgets get tighter, with expenses growing at a faster pace than revenues, cities have been forced to use available funds to balance the operating budget and have not put enough into savings (i.e. reserves) for future spending needs. It is critical that PVE have a handle on its capital spending needs for the next five years (and an outlook for years 6-10) and then develop a strategy for setting required funds aside. This work is included in the Long Range Financial Plan. Similar to the Pension Funding Policy that this Council implemented, the next thing we need is a policy that sets a discipline for putting away surplus funds as they become available so that money is available when large projects need to be tackled in the future.””

“DAVID MCGOWAN (incumbent)
”This issue is extremely important and fundamental to successful city management. I have been urging a focus on long-range planning since my election to the city council.

Recently, a committee was created to work with the new Public Works Director to identify and define the city’s infrastructure needs, by project, time frame and estimated cost. The initial work product is expected prior to the November elections and is a critical missing component to the City’s Long-Range Plan.

Our infrastructure is aged and has not been maintained due to fiscal limitations. The City Hall complex needs attention that also has been deferred. Infrastructure funds needed will be substantial.

As part of the Long-Range Plan, the City Council needs to define all capital asset needs and develop a cash flow methodology as to how these needs will be met. I believe monies need to be set aside annually to have the funding available when needed. Until we can quantify the timing and magnitude of the cash flow requirements, it is impossible to speculate as to what all the funding options may be.

We need to initiate discussions with LA County Fire for improvements related to their occupancy of a portion of City Hall. By contract improvements to the “fire house” should be 80% funded by LA County. We need to ensure that LA County is planning for the needed funds and the timeframe needed.””

“DESIREE “DEZ” MYERS
”Re: Importance
Planning for costs and cost avoidance is imperative for fiscal stability and residents’ quality of life.

Infrastructure is a critical cost of running the city, but not all infrastructure needs, identified in the $40 million infrastructure plan, are critical.

RE: how much priority should the Council place on developing and implementing a funding strategy for repair and/or future replacement of infrastructure
High priority should be placed on infrastructure that is categorized as high priority

RE: versus the city’s other competing spending priorities
This needs to be laid out to residents. Essential services include police and storm drains. Lesser priorities can be separate options.

RE: including consideration of using debt to finance infrastructure
Yes, bonds are an option with pros/cons noted to residents.””