Posted: November 12th, 2007

Members Critical of Quimby Fees Management, Ask for Quarterly Updates

by Anna Scott

Los Angeles City Council members had harsh words for Recreation and Parks General Manager Jon Kirk Mukri last week, when Mukri appeared at City Hall to report on the department’s embattled Quimby program, which generates park funds.

“It is unacceptable to me, in general terms, in collective terms, to see so much money going unspent,” said City Council President Eric Garcetti, who delivered the most pointed criticism. Rebuking Recreation and Parks for a lack of transparency, he continued, “The council offices and communities where these Quimby dollars are being raised don’t have the information that they need.”

Quimby fees are assessments charged to housing developers for park projects. Collected and administered by the Department of Recreation and Parks, the fees generally cost between $3,000 and $9,000 for each new residential unit and must be spent on park projects within two miles of where they are gathered.

The department has collected more than $120 million citywide over the past five years, though in an Oct. 12 letter to Mayor Antonio Villaraigosa, Mukri admitted that his department has struggled to manage and allocate Quimby money.

Currently, about $77 million in Quimby funds remains unallocated citywide.

“It’s truly a shame,” Garcetti said, “to see these larger amounts of funding sitting unallocated and depreciating.”

Need for Improvement

Recreation and Parks has been widely criticized in recent months for its management of Quimby funds, which have skyrocketed in recent years along with a construction boom.

Council District Nine, which includes much of Downtown, has accumulated approximately $15.9 million in Quimby fees since 2002. About $3 million remains unallocated.

In September, Downtown Los Angeles developers expressed outrage over the city’s elimination of a discount previously given for some adaptive reuse, live-work units; local stakeholders questioned where the millions already collected in Quimby fees have gone.

Old Bank District developer Tom Gilmore appealed the fee hike, but last Thursday withdrew his motion.

Nonetheless, the outcry and the poor tracking led Council members to demand updated information on Quimby funds. Additionally, City Controller Laura Chick has launched an audit of the Quimby program that will focus specifically on Downtown.

At the request of Ninth District Councilwoman Jan Perry, Mukri gave a presentation before the Council’s Arts, Parks, Health and Aging Committee two weeks ago on the status of the Quimby program.

His PowerPoint presentation before the full Council last Tuesday was nearly identical, and included a district-by-district breakdown of Quimby collections and allocations, details on a new computerized mapping system Recreation and Parks is building to help manage the money, and information on a citywide study the department is conducting to identify park needs.

Some council members chastised Mukri for not providing the information sooner.

“We’ve been waiting for months in Council District 13 for an update on Quimby fees,” said Garcetti. “The information we have had is two years old, and it didn’t include the fees that were collected during the housing boom,” he continued, “which is precisely when we need to be as aggressive as possible about open space.”

Seventh District Councilman Richard Alarcon also said that his office has received little information on Quimby funds in the past.

“We can’t possibly track each and every assignment of dollars to a particular park,” said Alarcon, “when we should be relying on the Department of Recreation and Parks to do that for us.”

Looking for Solutions

Though some council members expressed disappointment with Recreation and Parks’ management of Quimby dollars, they also floated ideas for improving the program.

Several suggested easing the strict requirements on where and how Quimby dollars can be used in order to create more spending opportunities.

Perry, whose district includes much of Downtown and South L.A. - which has seen relatively little construction in recent years but shares Downtown’s need for parks - directed Recreation and Parks to consult with the City Attorney on finding ways to funnel surplus Quimby funds from development-heavy neighborhoods to nearby areas.

Bernard Parks, whose Eighth District has accumulated only $786,633 in Quimby funds since 2002, broached expanding the two-mile radius as a way to more evenly distribute Quimby money.

“Certain communities go decades without a market-rate development,” he said. Pointing out that the problems with Quimby likely reflect larger issues, he added, “Our housing policies may be out of balance.”

During last week’s meeting, Mukri said that Recreation and Parks is looking into widening the two-mile radius.

But in a separate interview, Garcetti said it may be premature to consider amending the Quimby ordinance.

“First we need to focus on the fundamentals,” said Garcetti. “We need more transparency of those dollars; we need the quarterly reports, and those reports need to be timely with the latest balances.”

Asking for Accountability

City Council members ultimately voted unanimously to require Recreation and Parks to provide quarterly Quimby updates to each council district office.

Acknowledging past lapses, Mukri said that Recreation and Parks shares the Council’s concerns about keeping accessible, current Quimby records.

“That’s exactly why we’re doing what we’re doing,” he said, referring to the improvements underway, and promised that city officials will see “things that we have never done before, that we are going to do now.”

However, Garcetti said, “I still think we have a long way to go.”

Contact Anna Scott at anna@downtownnews.com.