Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAbout01-08-1998 Joint Meeting - City Councils and Board of Supervisors of SLO CountyAGENDA SPECIAL JOINT MEETING OF THE CITY COUNCILS AND THE BOARD OF SUPERVISORS OF SAN LUIS OBISPO COUNTY (HOSTED BY THE CITY OFATASCADERO) Thursday, January 8, 1998 6:00 P.M. — Social Hour 7:00 p.m. - Regular Session Atascadero Lake Park Pavilion 9315 Pismo Ave. Atascadero, California "GENERAL INFORMATION" Copies of the staff reports or other documentation relating to each item of business referred to on the Agenda are on file in the office of the Atascadero City Clerk, 6500 Palma Ave., Suite 208, Atascadero and are available for public inspection during City Hall business hours. In compliance with the Americans with Disabilities Act, if you need special assistance to participate in this meeting, please contact the Atascadero City Clerk's office (805-461-5074). Notification at least 48 hours prior to the meeting will assist the City staff in assuring that reasonable arrangements can be made to provide accessibility to the meeting. "SPECIAL MEETING PROTOCOL" ■ Atascadero Mayor, Harold L. Carden, III, will chair the meeting. ■ The business meeting will begin at 7:00 p.m. and adjourn no later than 11:00 p.m. ■ PubIic Comment will be limited to two minutes per speaker with a total of 16 minutes. ■ Due to the large number of City Councilmembers in attendance, Mayors and Councilmembers are respectfully requested to limit their comments and/or questions to two minutes. If a Mayor or Councilmember wishes to be recognized by the Chair, he or she may indicate so by raising their hand. ■ Staff presentations will be limited to ten minutes. ■ Motions will need to be ratified by each Council. Mayor Carden will recognize each of the respective Mayors, who in turn will put the item to a vote of his/her Council. In order to facilitate this process, discussion by individual Councilmembers should be limited to a minimum due to the large number of elected officials present. SPECIAL JOINT MEETING: 7:00 P.M. CALL TO ORDER: Mayor Carden RECEIVEr) PLEDGE OF ALLEGIENCE: Boy Scout Color Guard DE C 2 4 1997 SLO CITY X11 FlCIL PO o 4 NEY ❑ MGMT TEAM' � — ❑ C DIR P yiR' CHIEF �E?N1 DIRRKIORIa FE LICE CHF C DIR IL DIR [PERS DIR Copies of the staff reports or other documentation relating to each item of business referred to on the Agenda are on file in the office of the Atascadero City Clerk, 6500 Palma Ave., Suite 208, Atascadero and are available for public inspection during City Hall business hours. In compliance with the Americans with Disabilities Act, if you need special assistance to participate in this meeting, please contact the Atascadero City Clerk's office (805-461-5074). Notification at least 48 hours prior to the meeting will assist the City staff in assuring that reasonable arrangements can be made to provide accessibility to the meeting. "SPECIAL MEETING PROTOCOL" ■ Atascadero Mayor, Harold L. Carden, III, will chair the meeting. ■ The business meeting will begin at 7:00 p.m. and adjourn no later than 11:00 p.m. ■ PubIic Comment will be limited to two minutes per speaker with a total of 16 minutes. ■ Due to the large number of City Councilmembers in attendance, Mayors and Councilmembers are respectfully requested to limit their comments and/or questions to two minutes. If a Mayor or Councilmember wishes to be recognized by the Chair, he or she may indicate so by raising their hand. ■ Staff presentations will be limited to ten minutes. ■ Motions will need to be ratified by each Council. Mayor Carden will recognize each of the respective Mayors, who in turn will put the item to a vote of his/her Council. In order to facilitate this process, discussion by individual Councilmembers should be limited to a minimum due to the large number of elected officials present. SPECIAL JOINT MEETING: 7:00 P.M. CALL TO ORDER: Mayor Carden RECEIVEr) PLEDGE OF ALLEGIENCE: Boy Scout Color Guard DE C 2 4 1997 SLO CITY X11 ROLL CALL: City ofArroyo Gratzde Mayor A.K. "Pete" Dougall Michael Lady Michael Fuller Thomas A. Runels Steve Tolley CC t y of Morro Bay Mayor Cathy Novak Rodger Anderson Dave Elliott William Peirce Janice Peters Citgof5an Luis Cbispo Mayor Allen K. Settle Bill Roalman Dave Romero Dodie Williams Kathy Smith APPROVAL OF AGENDA: City ofAtascadero Mayor Harold L. Carden, III Ray Johnson George Luna Jerry L. Clay, Sr. Kenneth Lerno Ciiy of Paso Robles Mayor Duane J. Picanco Tom Baron Walter J. Macklin Lee Swanson Christian E. Inversen County of San Luis Obispo Chairwoman Ruth Barckett Harry L. Ovitt Bud Laurent Peg Pinard Mike Ryan City of Grover Beach Mayor Dee Santos Robert Reed Henry E. "Gene" Gates Peter Keith Ronald Arnoldsen Q&of Pismg Beach Mayor John Brown Marian Mellow Hal Halldin Bill Rabenaldt Mary Ann Reiss COMMUNITY FORUM: This portion of the meeting is reserved for persons wanting to address the City Councils and Board of Supervisors on any matter not on this agenda and over which the Councils and Supervisors have jurisdiction. Speakers are limited to two minutes per speaker with a total of 16 minutes. Please state your name and address for the record before making your statement. A. ACTION ITEMS: A JOINT RESOLUTION URGING THE STATE LEGISLATURE AND THE GOVERNOR TO APPROVE RESTORING OF PROPERTY TAXES. [Robert Reed, Councilmember of Grover Beach, will give background] [Allen Settle, Mayor of San Luis Obispo, will give report and present resolution] Recommendation: Approve Joint Resolution. Time: 30 minutes 2. A JOINT RESOLUTION CONCERNING FEDERAL REGULATION COORDINATION AND PERMITTING RELATIVE TO FLOOD PREVENTION. [Allen Settle, Mayor of San Luis Obispo, will give report and present resolution] Recommendation Time: 30 minutes Approve Joint Resolution. 2 3. A RECOMMENDATION THAT THE CITIES AND COUNTY SUPPORT IN CONCEPT THE CONSTITUTIONAL AMENDMENT TO GAIN GREATER FISCAL STABILITY FOR LOCAL GOVERNMENT. [Cathy Novak, Mayor of Morro Bay, will give report] Recommendations: 1. The Cities and County support in concept the constitutional amendment. 2. Each City and County individually support, by resolution, the final constitutional amendment package presented to the Legislature. Time: 30 minutes B. INFORMATION ITEMS: ELECTRIC INDUSTRY DE -REGULATION: AN INFORMATIONAL BRIEFING ON OPTIONS FACING LOCAL GOVERNMENTS. [Cathy Novak, Mayor of Morro Bay, will give information presentation] [Allen Settle, Mayor of San Luis Obispo, will present request of aggregating possibilities] Recommendation: City Managers explore all options and. report back findings to all Cities and County within four months. Time: 30 minutes ADJOURNMENT: 3 ITEM #A-1 MEMORANDUM DATE: JANUARY, 1998 TO: JOINT CITY COUNCILS MEETING FROM: BOB REED, CHAIRMAN, SUPPLEMENTAL TRANSPORTATION FUNDING COMMITTEE On June 5, 1997 at a special joint meeting of all the City Councils in the region a resolution proposed by the City of Grover Beach to explore placing a Y2 cent sales tax measure on the November 1998 ballot to be used for street and road purposes was approved. A committee was established consisting of one elected official and the Administrator from each City and the County. The committee held a total of three meetings to review the options for additional funding for transportation purposes, and made a determination at the last meeting not to proceed any further on this issue at this time. In the course of the three committee meetings all possible sources of supplemental revenue, and related issues were reviewed by the committee. Following a detailed discussion of the options and issues at the first meeting, the committee decided at its second meeting to focus in on an increase in the sales tax in subsequent meetings. This decision was due to the limited potential from most funding sources, and legal difficulties which could be expected from the other sources. At its third (and last) meeting, the committee decided not to proceed with any further meetings to seek an increase in the sales tax on a countywide basis at this time. This decision was made on the basis of the understanding that the necessary circumstances to successfully proceed with an election were not present, and due to the lack of participation by the County in the committee deliberations. The original decision to establish a committee to evaluate options for a countywide effort to increase funding for local street and road purposes was based largely on the findings in a study on Local Street and Road Maintenance Needs prepared by Council of Governments staff. This study found that there is a significant backlog of road maintenance and rehabilitation needs, and that current local revenues are not adequate to pay for all the needed work. Following are summaries of the information presented at the three committee meetings. Steering Committee Meeting #1 (August 21`` Agenda - This meeting was focused on a general review of the problem of providing adequate funding for local street and road maintenance, the legal requirements to increase funding, and public attitudes and opinions. Problem Definition - The "problem" is made up of two parts. The first is the estimated extent of local street and road maintenance needs, and the second is the availability of funding to address the need. The Countywide Pavement Maintenance and Rehabilitation Needs report, presented to the SLOCOG Board in June, 1997, showed that there is a $50 to $140 million "backlog" of additional maintenance needed to bring local streets and roads up to "good" or "best" condition. The committee reviewed the Annual Report of Financial Transactions Concerning Streets and Roads, compiled by the State Controllers Office in order to see how local jurisdictions using their street and road funding. This report shows that for the four year period between Fiscal Year 91/92 and 94/95: ")00001 ITEM #A-1 • A total of $81 million in expenditures was reported for all jurisdictions. • Of that total, $47 million was for "maintenance" purposes. ■ For FY 94/95 this report shows that over $10.8 million, about half of all funds made available to all jurisdictions in the region was made available to the County of San Luis Obispo for street and road purposes. ■ The remainder, about $10 million, was divided up among the seven cities. The committee reviewed several other tables on the uses of all Federal, State and local funding sources. It was noted that: Of 35 sources of funds for transportation purposes, only twelve can be used for local street and road purposes, ■ Of those twelve only four can be used for road maintenance. a Of these, two sources, gas tax subventions, and Transportation Development Act (TDA) funds, are allocated by formula from the State. ■ The only other funding sources is the Surface Transportation Program (STP). It was noted that of the $10.8 million in STP funds projected to be allocated to the region over the six years of the next surface transportation act, $7.8 million (71 %) will be allocated directly to the cities and county, with the remaining $3 million (29%) to be allocated on a competitive basis. All available funding was found to be maximized. Legal Issues - The committee was presented with a review of the legal issues pertaining to an increase in the sales tax or other tax. This included a review of the history of State legislation and voter propositions since Proposition 13, that have limited the ability of local jurisdictions to increase their taxes. These issues included Proposition 62 (1986), which established the requirement for a two-thirds approval of the electorate for special taxes and majority for general taxes, and the Guardino Decision of 1995 by the State Supreme Court which invalidated a sales tax approved by a majority but less than two-thirds of the voters in Santa Clara County in a 1992 election. The major conclusion drawn by the committee from this presentation was that a "special tax" (proposed for a specific purpose) requires a two-thirds vote of approval and a "general tax" which requires only a majority vote and which cannot identify a particular purpose. Public Attitudes and Opinions - The committee was presented with a review of the results of surveys taken by the San Luis Obispo Council of Governments in 1990 and one taken by the Regional Rideshare Agency in 1997. The 1990 survey by Townsend & company was initiated by the Council of Governments at a cost of $30,000. This survey was intended to provide information on public attitudes toward a possible November, 1990 ballot measure proposing a half cent increase in the sales tax to pay for a range of transportation system improvements throughout the region. This survey found moderately strong public support for a variety of possible projects, however the consultants advised against proceeding because it did not show a sufficient level of support to assure passage based on their experience. Based on this advice, the SLOCOG Board decided not to proceed with a ballot measure. The 1997 survey by META Information Services was initiated by San Luis Obispo Regional Ridesharing as a tracking survey of voter attitudes regarding various transit and ridesharing programs as a follow-up to a similar survey in 1995. '),W002 ITEM #A-1 These included transportation behaviors, interest in potential ridesharing services, and formation of a transit district. For the 1997 survey, staff for the Region Transit Agency (SLORTA) and the Council of Government were given an opportunity to add questions of particular interest to our agencies. Questions were included in the survey on potential support for a sales tax increase to pay for various transportation system improvements, including local street and road maintenance. Following are comparisons of major findings of these two surveys: • The 1990 survey found that 52% of voters would support a '/2 cent sales tax increase measure for important county projects (highway, road, transit and other types); the 1997 survey found that 60.7% would support such a measure. • The 1990 survey found that 68% of the voters would support a 1/2 cent increase in the sales tax to pay for road and highway improvements; the 1997 survey found that 59.4% would support such a measure. The 1990 survey found that 76% of the voters would support a half cent sales tax to pay for street and road maintenance when it was part of a measure including a number of other kinds of projects; the 1997 survey found that 70.5% would be in favor of such a general purpose measure if it funded a number of other project types. The 1997 survey also found that if a special tax was proposed for only street and road repair and maintenance it would be supported by 52.4%. Steering Committee Meeting #2 (September 11th) Agenda - This meeting was focused on a more extensive and detailed review of the legal requirements for increasing local revenue, statewide efforts to increase funding, and local and regional options to increase funding. Legal Requirements - The focus of discussion on legal issues for this meeting was an explanation of Proposition 218 (1996), the Bradley -Bums Uniform Local Sales and Use Tax Law, and the status of the Santa Clara County sales tax increase measure. The committee was provided with excerpts from a publication of the State Legislative Analyst explaining the proposition. It is clear from this analysis that the process of raising taxes is more difficult than before, and that the two-thirds vote for a special tax is required. Review of the Bradley -Bums Uniform Sales and Use Tax Law focused on the legal and administrative constraints faced by individual cities seeking an increase in the sales tax. Further discussion of the legal issues focused on the fact that the 1996 Santa Clara election was being challenged in court. County Counsel, Jac Crawford reviewed the issues associated with the court challenge of the Santa Clara election, focusing on the legal differentiation between a general and special tax. He urged the committee to take a "wait and see" attitude to seeking a countywide sales tax increase, and recommended waiting until after the court makes a determination on the Santa Clara challenge. Statewide Efforts - This committee reviewed of a proposed ballot measure for the 1998 election proposed by the California Caucus for Cities and Schools. For the measure to be placed on the ballot 700,000 signatures must first be gathered. If approved, this initiative would give cities and counties the option to redistribute up to one cent of the present sales tax from the state on a per capita basis. This initiative is intended to replace funds taken by the state in recent years. K ')0000" ITEM #A-1 The California Caucus initiative would do the following: 1. Allow the governing board of any city, city and county, or county, by adoption of an ordinance by a two-thirds vote, propose to the voters a redistribution of existing sales tax revenue. 2. Provide that the method of redistribution would be by a reduction of the state sales tax and imposition of a local sales and use tax approved by a majority vote of the electorate. 3. Provide that the rate of the local tax would be allowed to reach either %z% in increments of one-tenth cent or one percent in increments of two-tenths cent over five years. 4. Require that no reduction in the state sales tax shall result in reduction in the amount of the state's obligation to schools. 5. Require the state to continue to meet its funding obligations according to the State Constitution without affecting the revenue received by cities and counties from state and local taxes. 6. Require that the provisions of the act be liberally construed to enable its purpose of providing voters with the option to redistribute sales and use taxes from the state to local government on a per capita basis to augment existing revenues. Local & Regional Options The committee reviewed summaries of various options which could be pursued to increase funding, including: the Transient Occupancy Tax (TOT); Local Option Gas Tax; Countywide Sales Tax; and Assessment Districts. Transient Occupancy Tax (TOT) - The committee reviewed excerpts from the SLOCOG 1997 Regional Profile which showed the amounts and distribution of revenue for jurisdictions in the region from 1985 through 1996. It was noted that in Fiscal Year 95/96 a total of $10.4 million in revenue was generated from all jurisdictions in the region. If in FY 95/96 all jurisdictions in the region had increased their tax to 10% Arroyo Grande would have had a 3.5% share of the TOT collected in the region and revenues would have increased by more than $153,000 to a total of $383,230; Atascadero would have increase its share by a tenth of a percent and would have collected nearly $120,000 more in revenue; and the County would have increased its share by nearly 1.6% and captured nearly $300,000 more in revenue. Local Option Gas Tax - The committee reviewed an analysis of this option. Such an increase is considered a special tax, requiring a two-thirds vote of the electorate for approval. No such increase has every succeeded. In addition, a bill (AB 595, Brown) has been introduced in the State Legislature which would authorize the Metropolitan Transportation Commission (MTC) to seek a 10 cent increase in the gas tax for imposition in the nine county San Francisco Bay Area. California currently imposes an excise (gas) tax of 18 cents per gallon on fuel used in highway vehicles. In addition, the Federal fuel tax is 18.3 cents per gallon, for a total of 36.3 cents per gallon. It was noted that a one cent increase in the tax would annually produce a total of $1,196,000. By comparison, a half cent increase in the sales tax is estimated to annually produce a total of about $11 million annually. The gas tax would have to be increased by 9 cents to produce the same amount of revenue as a half cent increase in the sales tax. 4 ITEM #A-1 Countywide Sales Tax Measure - The committee was presented with a detailed review of the options and issues associated with attempting to seek an increase in the sales tax as either a general or special tax. Key points are as follows: Between 1984 and 1990 the voters of nineteen counties approved sales tax increase measures for transportation purposes. Of these, fifteen were approved with less that a two- thirds vote. In 1986, Proposition 62 was approved by the voters; it required a two-thirds voter approval for special taxes and a majority vote for general taxes. In 1987 SB142 (Deddeh) enacted the Local Transportation Authority and Improvement Act which authorized any county board of supervisors to create or designate a local transportation authority, and authorized it to impose a retail sales tax of up to 1 % with a two- thirds vote of the authority and subsequent approval of a majority of the voters. The issue of majority versus two-thirds vote for special taxes was further clarified in 1995, when the State Supreme Court, in the Guardino decision, invalidated a sales tax approved by a majority but less than two-thirds of the voters in Santa Clara County in a 1992 election. In 1996, Santa Clara County successfully received voter approval of a .5 % increase in the local sales tax for general purposes (a major portion of which is likely to be expended on transportation system maintenance and improvements based on the results of the companion advisory measure): a) The Santa Clara County strategy included two complimentary measures (A & B), the first of which was an "advisory expenditure plan", and the second which actually raised the sales tux by .5%. b) Measure A, the advisory expenditure plan, won by 73%; Measure B, which raised the sales tax by .5 % for general purposes passed by 52%. c) The Santa Clara measures were presented to the voters without an 'official" promise linking the two measures, thereby minimizing the possibility of successful legal challenges based on state law concerning imposition of special taxes. d) The sales tax increase measure has been challenged and a decision is expected by May, 1998 Assessment Districts - Tom Sullivan, Grover Beach Interim City Manager, reviewed establishing a countywide assessment district for local street and road maintenance. He noted that Proposition 218 made this option much more difficult, and noted that other difficulties with preparation of cost estimates makes it impractical for application on a countywide basis for street and road maintenance. He recommended against further evaluation of this option. The committee agreed not to pursue it at this time. Mayor Cathy Novak of Mono Bay motioned to focus on the local option sales tax and the return of the state sales tax as proposed in the proposition by the California Caucus for Cities and Schools at a future meeting; seconded by Mayor Pete Dougall of Arroyo Grande and approved. Steering Committee Meeting #3 (October 23rd) Final Meeting Agenda - The focus of this meeting included: a review the results of the first two committee meetings; the final status of relevant State legislation; conduct a telephone conference call with 5 ')00 0 01- ITEM #rA-1 Max Besler, a principal with a major public relations firm which has managed the development and promotion of several significant sales tax measures throughout the state of California; and determine a course of action. Committee delegates from four of the seven cities in the region were present, including: Atascadero, Grover Beach, Morro Bay, and San Luis Obispo. Telephone Conference - Staff arranged for a teleconference to provide the committee members with the professional perspective of a private consultant on the process of carrying out a sales tax measure campaign, and the likelihood of success. Committee staff reviewed the work Mr. Besler had done for Santa Clara County on their last successful sales tax increase measure. The committee was presented with what Mr. Besler had previously identified as the necessary components of a successful sales tax increase campaign, including: the participation and support of -the County Board of Supervisors; a public opinion survey: establishment of a private sector support group. with funding; and adequate funding to carry out a campaign. The committee discussed the likelihood of successfully putting all the necessary components together, and by consensus decided it would not be necessary to hold the conference call at this time. Board of Supervisors Representation - Committee Chairman Bob Reed explained that he had sent a letter to Supervisor Ruth Brackett requesting a represenxative to the committee, However, the Board_ expressed no interest in pursuing the proposed sales tax measure. Legal & Legislative Update - The committee received an update on Assembly Bill 1362, on local government finance, which, if it had not been vetoed by the Governor, would have made the decision of the State Supreme Court in the Guardino Decision inapplicable to any tax first imposed by an ordinance or resolution adopted prior to December 14, 1995. The committee also received a presentation on the status of the appeal of the Santa Clara County sales tax measure. It was noted that the Santa Clara County Counsel had informed staff that they were very optimistic about the chances of the committee to succeed in the matter. Revenues & Expenditures - Staff reviewed information from a study by the Surface Transportation Policy Project (STPP) which indicated that four times as much money is spent annually nationwide to repair vehicles damaged by potholes then is spent to fix roads. It was further noted that the study found that since the growth in the sale of motor vehicle fuels (gallons) is essentially flat, the tax on fuel would have to be increased by 39 cents per gallon to produce revenue equal to the equivalent amount in 1967. Determine Course of Action - Committee Chairman Bob Reed stated that in his opinion the committee should go back to the (original) idea of pursuing a half -cent sales tax increase for transportation purposes. He noted that the voters should be given the opportunity to approve the measure or not. Such an action would still require the support of the Board of Supervisors to move forward however. Atascadero Mayor Johnson noted that the committee did not appear to have the support of all seven cities in order to go to the Board of Supervisors, and suggested taking_ the matter back to the next Mayor's meeting for more discussion. A suggestion was made to have a delegation of the committee meet with Board Chair Ruth Brackett to seek a firm position on the sales tax measure. The committee discussed several other issues of concern that would have to be considered in pursuing a sales tax measure. A consensus of the committee was then reached to bring up the issue at the next mayor's meeting to see if their was a consensus to take the issue to the Board of Supervisors. The meeting was then adjourned. Notes prepared by Mike Harmon, Associate Transportation Planner assigned to staff the Committee. C. -);J 0 0 iF ITEM .#A-1 'oRIas A JOINT RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCILS OF �(� ";V l oqS SAN LUIS OBISPO COUNTY AND THE COUNTY BOARD OF SUPERVISORS URGING THE STATE LEGISLATURE AND THE GOVERNOR TO APPROVE RESTORING PROPERTY TAXES PREVIOUSLY TAKEN AWAY FROM THE CITIES AND COUNTIES AND AUTHORIZING RESTORED PROPERTY TAXES TO BE USED FOR LOCAL GOVERNMENT NEEDS WHEREAS, the State of California, in order to deal with their own budgetary shortfalls, took property tax revenue away from general purpose local government units (counties and cities) in fiscal years 1992 through 1994, and WHEREAS, since that time most units of local government have had a very difficult time delivering services to their citizens, igcluoing public safety and building and maintaining needed public facilities because of this loss of revenue, and WHEREAS, most local government jurisdictions have also had a very difficult time constructing and maintaining their street and road systems due to insufficient funding for this purpose, and WHEREAS, most units of local government have had to use available general funds for critically needed public services such as police and fire, which has resulted in the neglect of maintaining our public facilities and infrastructure and, in doing so, has contributed to a deteriorated condition of our streets and roads, and WHEREAS, units of California local government will continue to see the further deterioration of their facilities and infrastructure and, particularly, streets and roads, unless additional funds are made available for this purpose. NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED by the City Councils of the cities of San Luis Obispo County and the County Board of Supervisors that we urge the Governor and the Legislature of the State of California to move forthrightly and expeditiously to restore property taxes previously taken from the cities and counties to meet local needs such -a& -p} d, truc i�eaiim and BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED that the City Councils and the Board of Supervisors of San Luis Obispo County believe this matter is of great urgency for the units of local government and is of the highest public interest both to people residing within cities and counties and, therefore, to the citizens of the State of California. ')0000"- ITEM #A-1 PASSED AND ADOPTED by the City Councils of the Cities of San Luis Obispo County at a special joint meeting held on the day of , 1998. ATTEST: City Clerk ATTEST: City Clerk ATTEST: City Clerk ATTEST: City Clerk ATTEST: City Clerk Chairperson, Board of Supervisors San Luis Obispo County Mayor, City of Arroyo Grande Mayor, City of Atascadero Mayor, City of Grover Beach Mayor, City of Morro Bay Mayor, City of Paso Robles Mayor, City of Pismo Beach )j0008 ATTEST: City Clerk Mayor, City of San Luis Obispo ATTEST: City Clerk ITEM #A-1 ITEM #A-2 A JOINT RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCILS OF SAN LUIS OBISPO COUNTY�� q u, AND THE COUNTY BOARD OF SUPERVISORS URGING THE CONGRESS OF THE UNITED STATES TO STREAMLINE 111E PROCESS LOCAL AGENCIES MUST FOLLOW TO OBTAIN PERMITS TO CONSTRUCT IMPROVEMENTS TO REPAIR DAMAGE CAUSED BY DISASTROUS FLOODING AND TO PROTECT IMPROVED AND UNIMPROVED WATERWAYS FROM FUTURE FLOOD DAMAGE. WHEREAS, the Federal Government has adopted the National Environmental Policy Act and the Endangered Species Act, and WHEREAS, the Federal Government did thereby assume regulatory authority over placement of fill and excavation of material from within all waterways and wetlands and protection of biological organisms living within the waterways and wetlands, and WHEREAS, the Federal Government has defined all work to, in, on or within those waterways and wetlands to be under their jurisdiction, and WHEREAS, local agencies are thus required to obtain permission of the Federal Government prior to addressing the needs of their citizens, and WHEREAS, the Federal Government has spread the implementation of the National Environmental Policy and Endangered Species Acts among a myriad of agencies and under a myriad of regulations, and WHEREAS, the Federal Government has established the Department of the Interior and the Department of Commerce and assignment them the responsibility to protect certain wild life, and WHEREAS, the Department of the Interior has not established guidelines, for its assigned area of responsibility, that allow the local agency to address the needs of its citizens, and WHEREAS, the Department of Commerce has not established guidelines, for its assigned area of responsibility, that allow the local agency to address the needs of its citizens, and ')00010 WHEREAS, the Department of Army is given authority to issue permits prior to any dredging or filling in waterways or wetlands, and has adopted certain Nationwide Permits, and WHEREAS, the Department of the Army has the freedom to not issue permits following their own Nationwide Permit system, even though that might be internally consistent in its implementation of regulations under its authority, and WHEREAS, the Environmental Protection Agency has the authority to direct the Department of the Army to restrict or reject a permit application, and WHEREAS, the current practice of issuing permits has not been effective in either protecting the environment or the citizens within urban areas due to internal Federal inconsistencies, missing communication, and non-existent coordination, and WHEREAS, local agencies must prepare plans, conduct environmental studies and hearings to meet the already strict requirements of the State of California regarding protection of the environment, and WHEREAS, the local agency, with clear, concise Federal guidelines and adopted standards from the State of California, via its permitting process, could enforce the Federal regulations thus enhancing the process and eliminating the confusion and frustration created by multiple Federal permitting agencies, and NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED by the City Councils of the cities of San Luis Obispo County and the County Board of Supervisors that we urge the President and the Congress of the United States of America to move forthrightly and expeditiously to simplify the process of permitting the work necessary in lakes, creeks, waterways, and wetlands by directing the agencies to adopt fair and equitable standards for use in California and delegate,author'ty to the local agencies and to the State of California to pw i+10 U-5 follow those reasonable:tandards in the process of meeting the needs of their citizens e a ation a ed for tion o e 5T1�A-pro ram ar a cans c ron and main enance o g BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED that the City Councils and the Board of Supervisors of San Luis Obispo County believe this matter is of great urgency for the ITEM #A-2 11-)60011 ITEM #A-2 units of local government and is of the highest public interest both to people residing within cities and counties and therefore, to the citizens of the United States. PASSED AND ADOPTED by the City Councils of the Cities of San Luis Obispo County at a special joint meeting held on the day of 1998. ATTEST: Clerk ATTEST: City Clerk ATTEST: City Clerk ATTEST: City Clerk Chairperson, Board of Supervisors San Luis Obispo County Mayor, City of Arroyo Grande Mayor, City of Atascadero Mayor, City of Grover Beach Mayor, City of Morro Bay I� U 0 0 12 ATTEST: City Clerk ATTEST: City Clerk ATTEST: City Clerk ATTEST: City Clerk Mayor, City of Paso Robles Mayor, City of Pismo Beach Mayor, City of San Luis Obispo ITEM #A-2 )u0013 ITEM #rA-3 C. cy of Morro Bay r ^�` �.� � --_� ti_ ^�- .`+— -- - moi_ �� �` : Wit= « .�•:�•r•�.,+w•.:.`..,..__�... w.... '-vrb"'.:+ .c Joint San Luis Obispo Cities and County Meeting Report Date: December 11, 1997 To: All City Councils and Board of Supervisors From: Mayor Cathy Novak DISCUSSION Currently the League of California Cities is working on a proposal to expand its efforts to "protect, restore and reform" city financing. Included in this legislative package is a constitutional amendment to protect government revenues from further state take -away. As you recall, the State began in 1992 with the Educational Revenue Augmentation Fund (ERAF) which took away money away from cities to give to the schools. The state has continually imposed costly mandates and diverted funds from local government. With the ever- increasing difficulties in providing a balanced budget and revenue for community services it has become necessary to pursue legislative efforts to prevent further diversion and manipulation of local government funds. Attached for your review, is a draft constitutional amendment entitled "Right to Local Fiscal Stability Act." At the time of this writing the League of California Cities Board has not made a final decision on the title of the amendment nor all the proposed language. The Board expects to have a final document by the end of this year. It will then be presented to the Legislature for their consideration in January 1998. A constitutional amendment requires a two/thirds vote of both houses and if passed will be on the November 1998 ballot. A 50 percent voter approval is then required for passage. Specifically, the measure would include: (1) • Determine that the power to tax from the Constitution, not state legislation, and that only local government agency and its electorate can levy, modify, re -allocate and/or revise local taxes and other local revenue sources. FINANCE ADMINISTRATION FIRE DEPARTMENT PUBLIC WORKS 595 Harbor Street 595 Harbor Street 715 Harbor Street 695 Harbor Street HARBOR DEPARTMENT PLANNING AND BUILDING POLICE DEPARTMENT RECREATION AND PARKS 1 275 Embarcadero ' 535 Harbor Street 850 Morro Bay Blvd. 1001 Kennedy Way ITEM #A-3 ■ Strengthen local governments' protection from unfunded mandates by requiring the state to pay for state programs with state funds. • Ensure citizens are provided with timely information on how these protected local funds are spent. (2) • Continue to fight for the return of ERAF money by applying pressure on the Legislature to return at least some portion of the money taken in the past. Particularly fines and forfeitures revenue which yields an estimated $62 million for cities. (3) • Establish a joint city -county authority to increase sales tax. The state has granted the counties the authority to seek local voter approval to increase countywide sales tax. However, the cities would not share in the authority and would not benefit directly from the increase. The goal is to provide cities with an option for additional local revenue and promote cooperation among cities and their respective counties. This constitutional amendment contains language at this time that may not receive support from a majority of cities. The League Board is diligently working on developing language that will accomplish the ultimate goal of preventing a future siphoning of local funds to the state level. This is a complex and politically charged issue and is the first of many steps in a long journey. I will continue to keep in contact with the League and provide the cities and county with updated information. Upon receipt of the final constitutional amendment language, I will draft a sample resolution for the individual councils and board consideration. I would urge all of us to closely monitor and support the effort of the League as this proposal advances through the Legislative process. RECOMMENDATION 1. That the Cities and County support in concept the constitutional amendment to gain greater fiscal stability for local government. 2. Each City and County individually support, by resolution, the final constitutional amendment package presented to the Legislature. 2 '))0015 ITEM #A-3 October 7, 1997 Right to Local Fiscal Stability Act SECTION 1. The people of California declare as follows: (a) This Constitution emphasizes the importance of local control of local government fiscal decisions. For example, Articles XIIIC and XIIID adopted by Proposition 218, gave taxpayers a greater role in determining whether or not local taxes for local programs should be imposed, repealed or reduced. (b) However, in recent years, the State Legislature has diverted revenues from cities and counties to cope with the State's budgetary problems. The State Legislature should not be allowed to frustrate the intent of local voters by appropriating local revenues for State purposes. (c) In enacting these constitutional changes, the voters intend to ensure that local revenues are available for essential city and county services. The State is prohibited, therefore, from shifting its financial obligations and problems to cities and counties by reducing or redirecting local revenues or by requiring cities and counties to enact and collect fees to pay for State programs. (d) Since educating our communities' children is a Constitutional priority in California, fiscal autonomy for cities and counties must be achieved in a manner which does not take money away from schools. (e) The public further intends to strengthen and clarify this Constitution's prohibition against unfunded mandates on local governments. (f) This amendment to the California Constitution shall be known as 'The Right to Local Fiscal Stability Act'. SECTION 2. Section 1(a) of Article XIIIA of the Constitution is amended to read as follows: (a) The maximum amount of any ad valorem tax on real property shall not exceed One percent (1%) of the full cash value of such property. The one percent (1%) tax to be collected by the counties and apportioned according to law to the districts within the counties. For purposes of the apportionment to cities and counties, "according to law" shall mean according to Article XIIIA, section 5. ')00016 ITEM #A-3 SECTION 3. Section 5 is added to Article XIIIA of the Constitution to read as follows: Sec. 5. Apportionment of property tax to cities and counties (a) Except as provided in subsection (b), beginning in fiscal year 1998-1999 and in each subsequent fiscal year, the revenue from the ad valorem tax on real property shall be apportioned to cities and counties in accordance with the law in effect on the date the Right to Local Fiscal Stability Act takes effect. (b) The proportionate share of the property tax received by cities and counties as provided in Section 5(a), may* be modified in accordance with: (i) a local determination made as part of a change of organization (including an incorporation, annexation, detachment, consolidation, disincorporation or dissolution); (ii) Article XVI, section 16 of this Constitution; (iii) the repayment or restoration 'of revenue from the ad valorem tax on real property to cities, counties, or cities and counties previously shifted between local governments and schools by the State Legislature; (iv) a local reapportionment approved by majority votes of the electorates of a majority of the cities and counties affected by the reapportionment representing a majority of the population. For purposes of this subdivision the population of a county shall mean the population of the unincorporated areas of that county. (c) The State Legislature may not reduce or redirect property tax revenues apportioned to cities and counties pursuant to this section, either directly or indirectly. SECTION 4. Section 24 of Article XIII is amended to read as follows: (a) The Legislature may not impose taxes for local purposes but may autho. ize4., l g-EweEnments to impose them. Money appropriated from state funds to a local government for its local purposes may be used as provided by law. Money subvened to a local government under Section 25 may be used for State or local purposes. (b) The power to impose any general and special tax is vested in each city county and city and county, but the people reserve to themselves the power to approve or disapprove such taxes in accordance with Articles XIIIA, XIIIC and XIIID of this Constitution. (c) The power to impose general and special taxes vested in each city, county and city and county is subject to the will of the voters of the city, county or city and county is not subject to amendment, repeal or modification by the State Legislature. 00017 ITEM #A-3 (d) The State Legislature shall not reduce or. redirect the revenues raised by general or special taxes imposed by a city, county or city and county. (e) The purpose of this section is to state clearly that the power to govern locally means little without the coordinate power to tax Iocally, subject to the voter approval requirements of Articles XIIIA, XIIIC, and XIIID of this Constitution. Therefore, (i) the power of any city, county, or city and county to impose any type of general or special tax shall not yield to a conflicting general law or to a'natter of statewide concern if the tax is a type that had been lawfully imposed prior to the effective date of the Right to Local Fiscal Stability Act. Such taxes shall include, but not be limited to, utility users taxes, transient occupancy taxes, and business license taxes. The fiscal authority guaranteed by this paragraph (e)(i) shall extend to all cities, counties and cities and counties whether or not any particular local government had imposed such a tax, so long as any local government had done so. (ii) As to taxes of a type first imposed by a city, county or city and county after the date referenced in paragraph (e)(i),. such taxes shall only yield to a conflicting general law or a matter of statewide concern when subordinating the local tax to State legislation that is consistent with the purposes of the Right to Local Fiscal Stability Act as stated in sections 1, 6, and 7 of that Act. (f) This Section 24 does not authorize a city, county or city and county to impose a tax which has been determined to be preempted by State legislation, such as a tippler's tax, a tobacco tax or a tax on savings and loans. SECTION 5. Section 29 of Article XIII is amended to read as follows: (a) The portion of the sales and use tax that is distributed to cities, counties and cities and counties, and the additional authority granted to cities, counties and cities and counties to increase the sales tax rates pursuant to law in effect on the date the Right to Local Fiscal Stability Act takes effect, shall be vested in each city, county and city and county. (b) The State Legislature shall neither reduce nor redirect the revenues raised by any sales and use tax the revenues or authority for which is vested in cities, counties, and cities and counties by section 29(a). (c) Any action of the State Legislature which broadens the base of the sales and use tax or otherwise enhances the revenues collected from this tax shall apply to the portion of the sales and use tax described in Section 29(a). (d) Counties; cities and counties and cities may enter into contracts to apportion between or among them the revenue derived from any sales or use tax imposed by them which is collected for them by the State. Before any such contract becomes operative, it shall be authorized by a majority of those voting on the question in each jurisdiction at a general or direct primary election. )0'0')18 ITEM #r`A-3 SECTION 6. Subsection (d) is added to Section 6 of Article XIIIB to read as follows: (d) This section shall be enforced by the courts so that the Legislature may not, by any means, undermine the goals of this section, Article X111A, section 5, Article XIII, section 24; and Article XIII, section 29, of establishing local financial self- determination and of requiring the State to pay for State programs with State revenues. An action by the State which shifts responsibility to fund a service or program from a State agency to a local government or from one local government to another, shall be construed as an action to undermine the goal of these sections, unless the Legislature (i) provides a subvention of funds to reimburse the affected local government for the full direct and indirect cost of such program or (ii) obtains the consent of the affected local government. SECTION 7. This measure shall be liberally construed to effectuate its purposes of enhancing local financial self-determination and reducing State influence in local fiscal affairs. SECTION 8. The provisions of this measure are severable. If any provision of this measure, or the application of this measure to any person or circumstances, is held to be invalid or in conflict with another measure which is approved by more voters at the same election, the remainder of this measures shall be effective. In the event the conflicting ballot measure is later held invalid, it is the voters' intent that this measure be reinstated and given the full force of law. -;,A) (A 9 - -,�, - ��- � 4, — � — - :5 ITEM #kB-1 C,,cy of Morro Bay — r 1 Joint San Luis Obispo Cities and County Meeting Report Date: December 9, 1997 To: All City Councils in San Luis Obispo County and County Board of Supervisors From: Morro Bay Mayor Cathy Novak DISCUSSION Just over a year ago, the California Legislature unanimously passed AB 1890 which represents California's attempt to restructure the electrical utility businesses as we now see them. January 1, 1998 will begin the new era of electric energy deregulation as the law created by AB 1890 goes into effect. Until now, electrical services have traditionally been provided by a single company; however, under the new law energy consumers will have the ability to choose their own energy provider. The ultimate goal of deregulation is to provide reduced rates to all consumers. Presently, all San Luis Obispo consumers including local government facilities are provided electric power from PG&E. At this time, the County of San Luis Obispo is exploring options through an RFP process to determine if an electrical rate reduction for their facilities is feasible. The incorporated City's in San Luis Obispo County should additionally explore the same concept. At this time, we should consolidate our efforts and work towards a beneficial plan that would encompass potential savings for all taxpayers in our County. RECOMMENDATION That the City Managers and County Administrator collectively do the following: 1. Explore all options to purchase electricity from a qualified service provider for local government facilities; 2. Provide options on how best to implement such a plan; 3. Provide level of net savings for each jurisdiction; and 4. Report back findings to all Cities and County within four months. FINANCE 595 Harbor Street ADMINISTRATION 595 Harbor Street FIRE DEPARTMENT 715 Harbor Street HARBOR DEPARTMENT PLANNING AND BUILDING POLICE DEPARTMENT 1275 Embarcadero 535 Harbor Street 850 Morro Bay Blvd. PUBLIC WORKS 695 Harbor Street , Q () ()' 0 RECREATION AND PARKS 1001 Kennedy Way BOARD OF SUPERVISORS COUNTY GOVERNMENT CENTER, Room 370 • SAN LUIS OBISPO, CALIFORNIA 93408-2040 • 805.781.5450 RECEIVED January 6, 1998 JAN -8 1998 ATASCADERO CITY MANAGER Mayor Harold L. Carden It I City of Atascadero 6500 Palma Ave. Atascadero, CA 93422 Dear Mayor Carden: ATTACHMENT A Joint Cities 01/08/98 HARRY L. OVITT, Supervisor District One LAURENCE L. LAURENT, Supervisor District Two PEG PINARD, Supervisor District Three RUTH E. BRACKETT, Supervisor District Four MICHAEL P. "JUIKE" RYAN, Supervisor District Fire On behalf of the San Luis Obispo County Board of Supervisors, I would like to express our appreciation for being invited to participate in the January 8 Joint Cities/County meeting. A majority of our Board has indicated that they will be in attendance in the capacity of a "Committee of the Whole." We welcome the opportunity to join in discussions on the various topics included on the agenda you forwarded to us. To this end, we have reviewed the agenda items and would like to offer the following preliminary comments: A-1 A Joint Resolution Urainp- the State Legislature and the Governor to Approve Restoring of P-roperty Taxes. Board Comments: We believe it is important to be in sync with the actions being taken on a statewide basis by the League of California Cities(League) and the California State Association of Counties(CSAC). At the recently concluded CSAC Annual Meeting in San Mateo a report was given that CSAC and the League were jointly working on a common approach to this issue. More recently, we were informed that this common approach was further explored in a CSAC/League Joint Task Force on Revenue meeting in December(minutes attached). That meeting resulted in an agreed upon approach to this issue which would focus on the state capping the property tax shift (ERAF) at a base year and returning the growth amount to local government. The proposed resolution included in the material sent to us.for the January 8 meeting does not include this element, i.e. returning the growth. Further, the proposed resolution calls upon the Governor and the Legislature to restore the property taxes to meet local needs such as public safety, building, and the maintenance of public facilities. Such language could lead to "earmarking" of funds which might be restored. The effort being undertaken by CSAC and the League contains no earmarking provisions and will urge the return of the growth amount as strictly discretionary revenue. We would recommend that our joint meeting endorse the noted effort by CSAC and the League rather that adopting the specific resolution included in the material. A-2 A Joint Resolution Concerning Federal Regulation Coordination and Permttinr Relative to Flood Prevention. Board Comments: We would propose certain revisions in the resolution. To highlight these for you, we have included a strike out version, noting the revisions, and a full "clean copy." These revisions add certain clarification verbiage to note references to the "Clean Water Act" and to a letter sent by Governor Wilson to President Clinton in October relative to avoiding a repeat of San Luis Obispo County's situation wherein we were approved for emergency work by numerous Federal and State agencies, only to be sued by the Environmental Protection Agency for having done the work without proper permits. The revision also proposes to substitute clarification- language relative to the freedom of the Department of the Army "not to issue permits" with the highlighted language shown just above the strikeout section. This new section also addresses the insufficiency of congressional funding to properly implement the permit review process. Finally, in the first `BE IT RESOLVED" section, two minor additions are included to indicate that expedition of the permit process is needed especially during emergencies, and the necessary work also includes road systems. A-3 A Joint Resolution to Support The League of California Cities' Campaign to Freeze the State's Takiniz From Local Fundin Sources. Board Comments: The memo from Mayor Novak of Morro Bay spoke to the general issue of fiscal stability. Attached to the memo was a draft constitutional amendment put together by the League of California Cities tentatively entitled "Right to Fiscal Stability." The Mayor's memo recommends that: (1) the Cities and County support in concept the constitutional amendment to gain greater fiscal stability for local government; and (2) Each City and County individually support, by resolution, the final constitutional amendment package presented to the Legislature. This proposed constitutional amendment was also the subject of the recent CSAC/League Joint Task Force on Revenues. It was agreed at the meeting that the proposed amendment would be modified by the League to include the element of a cap on the growth of the property tax shift (ERAF). With this proviso, the proposed amendment would be jointly supported by the League and CSAC, as would CSAC's effort, noted above in Staff Comments associated with item A-1, to get that growth returned to local government. We would recommend our joint meeting conceptually support such an amendment, but based upon a unified effort by the County and Cities to support language as agreed upon by CSAC and the League of California Cities. B-1 Electric Industry Deregulation: An Informational Briefing on Optign$ Facing Local Governments. Board Comments: The thrust of this item calls for a consolidation of efforts by the Cities and County which would encompass and maximize potential savings in the purchase of electricity following deregulation. The County's General Services Department is heading up our effort in this regard. In discussing this matter with the General Services Director we were informed that savings in electrical power costs will depend on several factors, and that at this time we do not have sufficient information to determine if a solo joint Cities/County effort would result in an economy of scale sufficient to generate significant savings. It may take further aggregation with other units of government, such as the Association of Bay Area Governments (ABAG) or perhaps with the State. In this respect, certain coordination efforts have already been initiated by the City Managers and the County Administrator, and more recently by SLOCOG. We are certainly in favor of exploring and enhancing this collaborative effort. On an "on -the -ground" basis, it would be helpful if the various Cities' departments charged with this effort contact and coordinate their activities with the County General Services Department. Again, Mayor Carden, we look forward to Thursday's meeting, and to the potential of future such meetings. In this latter regard, we believe it would be productive for such future meetings if the Chairperson of the Board of Supervisors were included in the development of the agendas for the meetings. To this end I look forward to working with you and the other mayors to usher in a new era of cooperation and coordination among our organizations. Sincerely, MICHAEL P. "MIKE" RYAN, Chairman Board of Supervisors attachments cc: Each City Mayor c:wpwinlwpdocslmrlcarden.ltr/ml A JOINT RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCILS OF SAN LUIS OBISPO COUNTY AND THE COUNTY BOARD OF SUPERVISORS l URGING THE CONGRESS OF THE UNITED STATES TO STREAMLINE THE PROCESS LOCAL AGENCIES MUCH FOLLOW TO OBTAIN PERMITS TO CONSTRUCT IMPROVEMENTS TO REPAIR DAMAGE CAUSED BY DISASTROUS FLOODING AND TO PROTECT IMPROVED AND UNIMPROVED WATERWAYS FROM FUTURE FLOOD DAMAGE WHEREAS, the Federal 'Government has adopted the National Environmental Policy Act Clean Water Act and the Endangered Species Act; and WHEREAS, the Federal Government did thereby assume regulatory authority over placement of fill and excavation of material from within all waterways and wetlands and protection of biological organisms living within the waterways and wetlands; and WHEREAS, the Federal Government has defined all work to, in, on or within those waterways and wetlands to be under their jurisdiction; and WHEREAS, local agencies are thus required to obtain permission of the Federal Government prior to addressing the needs of their citizens; and WHEREAS, the Federal Government has spread the implementation of the National Environmental Policy Clean Water Act and Endangered Species Act among a myriad of agencies and under a myriad of regulations; and WHEREAS, the Federal Government has established the Department of the Interior and the Department of Commerce and assigned them the responsibility to protect certain wildlife; and WHEREAS, the Department of the Interior has not established gui�djelines, for its assigned area of responsibility, that allow the local agency to address the needs of its citizens; and WHEREAS, the Department of Commerce has not established guidelines, for its assigned area of responsibility, that allow the local agency to address the needs of its citizens; and WHEREAS, the Department of Army is given authority to issue permits prior to any dredging or filling in waterways or wetlands, and has adopted certain Nationwide Permits; and WHEREAS, the Department of the Army has not issued permits or issued permits expeditiously for projects in accordance with either its Exemption or Natior_wide Permit system protocols, even though said projects are consistent with regulations under its authority, and WHEREAS, the Department of the Army has stated that Congress has not provided sufficient funds to properly implement the review process, and WHEREAS, the Environmental Proteclion Agency has the authority to direct the Department of the Army to restrict or reject a permit application; and WHEREAS, the current practice of issuing permits has not been effective in either protecting the environment or the -citizens within urban areas due to internal Federal inconsistencies, missing communication, and non-existent coordination; and WHEREAS, Governor Pete Wilson in a letter addressed to President Clinton on October 6, 1997 urged that "A clearly stated policy is needed to avoid a repeat of San Luis Obispo County's situation, when the County had approval from numerous Federal and State Agencies for emergency work only to be sued by the Federal Environmental Protection Agency"; and WHEREAS, local agencies must prepare plans, conduct environmental studies and hearings to meet the already strict requirements of the State of California regarding protection of the environment; and WHEREAS, the local agency, with clear, concise Federal guidelines and adopted standards from the State of California, via its permitting process, could enforce the Federal regulations thus enhancing the process and eliminating the confusion and frustration created by multiple Federal permitting agencies; and r NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED by the City Councils -)fthe cities of San Luis Obispo County and the County Board of Supervisors that we urge th,; President and Congress of the United State of America to move forthrightly and expeditiously to simplify the process of permitting, especially during emergencies, the work necessary in lakes, creeks, waterways, wetlands and to road systems by directing the agencies to adopt fair and equitable standards for use in California and delegate authority to the local agencies and to the State of California to follow those reasonable standards in the process of meeting the needs of their citizens in a way similar to the process the Department of Transportation established for implementation of the ISTEA program for the construction and maintenance of highways. BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED that the City Councils and the Board of Supervisors of San Luis Obispo County believe this matter is of great urgency for the units of local government and is of the highest public interest both to people residing within cities and counties and therefore, to the citizens of the United States. ATTEST: City Clerk ATTEST: Mayor, City of Arroyo Grande City Clerk ATTEST: Mayor, City of Atascadero City Clerk Mayor, City of Grover Beach ATTEST: City Clerk Mayor, City of Morro Bay ATTEST: City Clerk Mayor, City of Paso Robles ATTEST: City Clerk Mayor, City of Pismo Beach ATTEST: City Clerk ATTEST: County Clerk Mayor, City of San Luis Obispo Chair, County Board of Supervisors A JOINT RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCILS OF SAN LUIS OBISPO COUNTY AND THE COUNTY BOARD OF SUPERVISORS URGING THE CONGRESS OF THE UNITED STATES TO STREAMLINE THE PROCESS LOCAL AGENCIES MUCH FOLLOW TO OBTAIN PERMITS TO CONSTRUCT IMPROVEMENTS TO REPAIR DAMAGE CAUSED BY DISASTROUS FLOODING AND TO PROTECT IMPROVED AND UNIMPROVED WATERWAYS FROM FUTURE FLOOD DAMAGE WHEREAS, the Federal Government has adopted the National Environmental Policy Act :.,fFecc and the Endangered Species Act; and WHEREAS, the Federal Government did thereby assume regulatory authority over placement of fill and excavation of material from within all waterways and wetlands and protection of biological organisms living within the waterways and wetlands; and WHEREAS, the Federal Government has defined all work to, in, on or within those waterways and wetlands to be under their jurisdiction; and WHEREAS, local agencies are thus required to obtain permission of the Federal Government prior to addressing the needs of their citizens; and WHEREAS, the Federal Government has spread the implementation of the National Environmental Policy Cl t �IVater ::Act and Endangered Species Act among a myriad of agencies and under a myriad of regulations; and WHEREAS, the Federal Government has established the Department of the Interior and the Department of Commerce and assigm=ntass e them the responsibility to protect certain wildlife; and WHEREAS, the Department of the Interior has not established guidelines, for its assigned area of responsibility, that allow the local agency to address the needs of its citizens; and WHEREAS, the Department of Commerce has not established guidelines, for its assigned area of responsibility, that allow the local agency to address the needs of its citizens; and WHEREAS, the Department of Army is given authority to issue permits prior to any dredging or filling in waterways or wetlands, and has adopted certain Nationwide Permits; and Wal 50 W, is``> {� sued' ermitsotiM rtcen�U h�;d" z o ects arc' azrs e k t a ns u n er is ri kiassl .#d;thaCri -ess:as, Ol P... , ,. Y7 �i� V1:ri1■.I��l+fl1■ly.C.1■rlll+l�l�■1=X11+1:■ 111lIY���Ilti 1l■lYi�- - ---1■lll■1�h7.7el�l fl��IlLiti.71■11 71111■1:��*i�rt�1■�n.��.lisi(�1s111W=16ML=111111■1■lllillillillillkl: -M1, z• ■ WHEREAS, the Environmental Protection Agency has the authority to direct the Department of the Army to restrict or reject a permit application; and WHEREAS, the current practice of issuing permits has not been effective in either protecting the environment or the citizens within urban areas due to internr.l Federal inconsistencies, missing communication, and non-existent coordination; and >.� , ' ; ., � :� f alae � � � i r. t ❑f• '�5`� , Cou�� s srtuat�.d %er:tfi ' aunt. ad 1'�rova� t OuSFederal" iid'Stafe`' ` •-t r: 1. p -;?. :: :.. ,< erWA. .. work only to I3c sued by tTie'FedOra i Enyirorinieri#a1 Protection Agency,; an.. WHEREAS, local agencies must prepare plans, conduct environmental studies and hearings to meet the already strict requirements of the State of California regarding protection of the environment; and WHEREAS, the local agency, with clear, concise Federal guidelines and adopted standards from the State of California, via its permitting process, could enforce the Federal regulations thus enhancing the process and eliminating the confusion and frustration created by multiple Federal permitting agencies; and NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT -RESOLVED by the City Councils of the cities of San Luis Obispo County and the County Board of Supervisors that we urge the President and Congress of the United State of America to move forthrightly and expeditiously to simplify the process of permitting;;esp MI -Y ur g e e the work necessary in lakes, creeks, waterways, a-ndwetland s a>xod;ystrr by directing the agencies to adopt fair and equitable standards for use in California and delegate authority to, the local agencies and to the State of California to follow those reasonable standards in the process of meeting the needs of their citizens in a way similar to the process the Department of Transportation established for implementation of the ISTEA program for the construction and maintenan ,e of highways. BE IT FURTHER'RESOLVED that the City Councils and the Board of Supervisors of San Luis Obispo County believe this matter is of great urgency for the units of local government and is of the highest public interest both to people residing within cities and counties and therefore, to the citizens of the United States. ATTEST: City Clerk ATTEST: City Clerk ATTEST: City Clerk ATTEST: City Clerk ATTEST: City Clerk ATTEST: City Clerk ATTEST: City Clerk ATTEST: County Clerk Mayor, City of Arroyo Grande Mayor, City of Atascadero Mayor, City of Grover Beach Mayor, City of Morro Bay Mayor, City of Paso Robles Mayor, City of Pismo Beach Mayor, City of San Luis Obispo Chair, County Board of Supervisors JOINT RESOLUTION NO. J-1998-02 A JOINT RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCILS AND THE BOARD OF SUPERVISORS OF SAN LUIS OBISPO COUNTY URGING THE CONGRESS OF THE UNITED STATES TO STREAMLINE THE PROCESS LOCAL AGENCIES MUST FOLLOW TO OBTAIN PERMITS TO CONSTRUCT IMPROVEMENTS TO REPAIR DAMAGE CAUSED BY DISASTROUS FLOODING AND TO PROTECT IMPROVED AND UNIMPROVED WATERWAYS FROM FUTURE FLOOD DAMAGE. WHEREAS, the Federal Government has adopted the National Environmental Policy Act, Clean Water Act and the Endangered Species Act, and WHEREAS, the Federal Government did thereby assume regulatory authority over placement of fill and excavation of material from within all waterways and wetlands and protection of biological organisms living within the waterways and wetlands, and WHEREAS, the Federal Government has defined all work to, in, on or within those waterways and wetlands to be under their jurisdiction, and WHEREAS, local agencies are thus required to obtain permission of the Federal Government prior to addressing the needs of their citizens, and WHEREAS, the Federal Government has spread the implementation of the National Environmental Policy, Clean Water Act and Endangered Species Acts among a myriad of agencies and under a myriad of regulations, and WHEREAS, the Federal Government has established the Department of the Interior and the Department of Commerce and assigned them the responsibility to protect certain wild life, and WHEREAS, the Department of the Interior has not established guidelines, for its assigned area of responsibility, that allow the local agency to address the needs of its citizens, and WHEREAS, the Department of Commerce has not established guidelines, for its assigned area of responsibility, that allow the local agency to address the needs of its citizens, and Joint Resolution RE: Federal Permitting Relative to Floor Prevention Page 1 of 4 WHEREAS, the Department of Army is given authority to issue permits prior to any dredging or filling in waterways or wetlands, and has adopted certain Nationwide Permits, and WHEREAS, the Department of the Army has not issued permits or issued permits expeditiously for projects in accordance with either its Exemption or Nationwide Permit system protocols, even though said projects are consistent with regulations under its authority, and WHEREAS, the Department of the Army has stated that Congress has not provided sufficient funds to properly implement the review process, and WHEREAS, the Environmental Protection Agency has the authority to direct the Department of the Army to restrict or reject a permit application, and WHEREAS, the current practice of issuing permits has not been effective in either protecting the environment or the citizens within urban areas due to internal Federal inconsistencies, missing communication, and non-existent coordination, and WHEREAS, Governor Pete Wilson in a letter addressed to President Clinton on October 6, 1997 urged that "A clearly stated policy is needed to avoid a repeat of San Luis Obispo County's situation, when the County had approval from numerous Federal and State Agencies for emergency work only to be sued by the Federal Environmental Protection Agency"; and WHEREAS, local agencies must prepare plans, conduct environmental studies and hearings to meet the already strict requirements of the State of California regarding protection of the environment, and WHEREAS, the local agency, with clear, concise Federal guidelines and adopted standards from the State of California, via its permitting process, could enforce the Federal regulations thus enhancing the process and eliminating the confusion and frustration created by multiple Federal permitting agencies, and NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED by the City Councils of the cities of San Luis Obispo County and the County Board of Supervisors that we urge the President and the Congress of the United States of America to move forthrightly and expeditiously to simplify the process of permitting, especially during emergencies, the work necessary in lakes, creeks, waterways, wetlands and to road systems by directing the agencies to adopt fair and equitable standards for use in California and delegate authority to the local agencies and to the State of California to follow reasonable and expeditious standards. Joint Resolution RE: Federal Permitting Relative to Floor Prevention Page 2 of 4 BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED that the City Councils and the Board of Supervisors of San Luis Obispo County believe this matter is of great urgency for the units of local government and is of the highest public interest both to people residing within cities and counties and therefore, to the citizens of the United States. PASSED AND ADOPTED by the Cities of Arroyo Grande, Atascadero, Grover Beach, Morro Bay, Pismo Beach and San Luis Obispo, of San Luis Obispo County, at a special joint meeting held on the 8`" day of January, 1998. ar, City of Arroyo Gran e ATTEST: City Clerk ATTEST: - 'In City Clerk 1ST: City Clerk ATTEST: City Clerk � -0 nA/, L I�W/- Wid &1 0 F - -J ATTEST: C' Clerk G" ayor, City of tascader Vayor,' of Grover Beach A� (Y —C� Mayor, City o orro Bay MAl City of Pismo Beach T Mayor; City of San uis Obispo Joint Resolution RE: Federal Permitting Relative to Floor Prevention Page 3 of 4 PASSED AND ADOPTED by the City of Paso Robles of San Luis Obispo County at a Meeting held on the �-"— day of Mk6d# , 199.8. May r, City of Paso Robles ATTEST: City Clerk PASSED AND ADOPTED by the Board of Supervisors of San Luis Obispo County at a meeting held on the day of , 1998. ATTEST: Clerk Chairperson, Board of Supervisors San Luis Obispo County Joint Resolution RE: Federal Permitting Relative to Floor Prevention Page 4 of 4 JOINT RESOLUTION NO. J-1998-01 A JOINT RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCILS OF SAN LUIS OBISPO COUNTY AND THE COUNTY BOARD OF SUPERVISORS URGING THE STATE LEGISLATURE AND THE GOVERNOR TO APPROVE RESTORING PROPERTY TAXES PREVIOUSLY TAKEN AWAY FROM THE CITIES AND COUNTIES TO BE USED FOR LOCAL GOVERNMENT NEEDS WHEREAS, the State of California, in order to deal with their own budgetary shortfalls, took property tax revenue away from general purpose local government units (counties and cities) in fiscal years 1992 through 1994, and WHEREAS, since that time most units of local government have had a very difficult time delivering services to their citizens, including public safety and building and maintaining needed public facilities because of this loss of revenue, and WHEREAS, most local government jurisdictions have also had a very difficult time constructing and maintaining their street and road systems due to insufficient funding for this purpose, and WHEREAS, most units of local government have had to use available general funds for critically needed public services such as police and fire, which has resulted in the neglect of maintaining our public facilities and infrastructure and, in doing so, has contributed to a deteriorated condition of our streets and roads, and WHEREAS, units of California local government will continue to see the further deterioration of their facilities and infrastructure and, particularly, streets and roads, unless additional funds are made available for this purpose. NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED by the City Councils of the cities of San Luis Obispo County and the County Board of Supervisors that we urge the Governor and the Legislature of the State of California to move forthrightly and expeditiously to restore property taxes previously taken from the cities and counties to meet local needs, and BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED that the City Councils and Board of Supervisors of San Luis Obispo County believe this matter is of great urgency for the units of local government and is of the highest public interest both to people residing within cities and counties and, therefore, to the citizens of the State of California. Joint Resolution RE: Restoration of Property Taxes Page 1 of 3 PASSED AND ADOPTED by the Cities of Arroyo Grande, Atascadero, Grover Beach, Morro Bay, Pismo Beach and San Luis Obispo, of San Luis Obispo County, at a special joint meeting held on the 8t' day of January, 1998. ATTEST: 1 ATTEST: City Clerk ATTEST: City Clerk ATTEST: ATTEST: /ityClerk City of Arroyo Z ayor, 4ofadcao IZayor, C*ofejr Beach Mayor, City Morro Bay (2 e2'�z � � or, City of Pism Beach Mayor, City of San Luis'Obispo Joint Resolution RE: Restoration of Property Taxes Page 2 of 3 PASSED AND ADOPTED by the City of Paso Robles of San Luis Obispo County at a meeting held on the 3 day of %�% � , 1998. Mayor, City of Paso Robles ATTEST: City Clerk PASSED AND ADOPTED by the Board of Supervisors of San Luis Obispo County at a meeting held on the day of , 1998. ATTEST: Clerk Chairperson, Board of Supervisors San Luis Obispo County Joint Resolution RE: Restoration of Property Taxes Page 3 of 3 January 6, 1998 MEMORANDUM TO: Mayor Allen K. Settle MEETING DATE , -9B AGENDA J , ITEM # �- - m+ --s . FROM: Council Member Dave Romero r SUBJECT: Joint Cities/County meeting proposed resolution regarding restoration of property taxes. I have the following minor suggestions for rewording this resolution (attached): Eliminate wording in the title after "Counties" and substitute wording "to be used for local government needs." My reason for this is that if we mention specific programs such as public safety or public works, there may be strings attached. I believe we are better off with the more generic term of "local government needs." The same reasoning would apply to another suggested change under the heading "NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED," I would suggest we eliminate the wording "such as public safety and public works construction." DR:ss Attachment D Com' ❑ C!") r' Z d D� � D -Ac, ❑ Fll,-= :. Y ❑� CM—CM RI(IORIG [;I KCICE LICE CNr' ❑ MC3ldF M ❑ REC DIR p� ❑ UTIL DIR 0 13 PERS DIR M L. t-1 111w- # .� ++ra M 1-07-1998 1 : 51 AM FROMDATE $ ITEM # eta : P. 2 j11M6E7'1 N� BOARD OF SUPERVISORS COUNTY GOVERNMENT CENTER. Room 370 • SAN LUIS OBISPO, CALIFORNIA 93408-2040 + 805.781.5450 January 6, 1998 Mayor Harold L. Carden III City of Atascadero 6500 Palma Ave. Atascadero, CA 93422 Dear Mayor Carden: HARRY L. OVITT, Supervisor District One L-4UREeYCE L. LAUREN, Supervi8or Diatrict Two PEG PINARD. Supervisor District Three RUTH E. BRACKETT, Supervisor District Four MICHAEL P. "MIKE" RYAN, Supervisor District Five On behalf of the San Luis Obispo County Board of Supervisors, I would like to express our appreciation for being invited to participate in the January 8 Joint Cities/County meeting. A majority of our Board has indicated that they will be in attendance in the capacity of a "Committee of the Whole." We welcome the opportunity to join in discussions on the various topics included on the agenda you forwarded to us. To this end, we have reviewed the agenda items and would like to offer the :following preliminary comments: A-1 A Joint Resolution Urging the State Legislature and the Governor t A r v Property Taxes. Board Comments: We believe it is important to be in sync with the actions being taken on a statewide basis by the League of California Cities(League) and the California State Association of Counties(CSAC). At the recently concluded CSAC Annual Meeting in San Mateo a report was given that CSAC and the League were jointly working on a common approach to this issue. More recently, we were informed that this common approach was further explored in a CSAC/League Joint Task Force on Revenue meeting in December(minutes attached). That meeting resulted in an -agreed upon approach to this issue which would focus on the state capping the property tax shift (ERAF), at a base year and returning the growth amount to local. government. The proposed resolution included in the material sent to us for the January 8 meeting does not RECEIVED include this element, i.e, returning the growth. Further, the proposed resolution calls upon the Governor and the Legislature to restore the property taxes to meet local .I AN 0 7 1997 needs such as public safety, building, and the maintenance of public facilities. Such language could lead to "earmarking" of funds which might be restored. The effort 81-0 CITY COUNCIL being undertaken by CSAC and the League contains no earmarking provisions and will urge the return of the growth amount as strictly discretionary revenue. We would recommend that our joint meeting endorse the noted effort by CSAC and the League rather that adopting the specific resolution included in the material. D DI BHCIL ®ICCAO ®-F[ D RR 0F RE CHIEF ® TTORHEY 0 W DIR I0 LERK ORIO ❑ POLICE CHF E3 MG T M ❑ REC DIR C1- ❑ UTIL DIR C ❑ PERS DIA Mayor Harold L. Carden III City of Atascadero 6500 Palma Ave. Atascadero, CA 93422 Dear Mayor Carden: HARRY L. OVITT, Supervisor District One L-4UREeYCE L. LAUREN, Supervi8or Diatrict Two PEG PINARD. Supervisor District Three RUTH E. BRACKETT, Supervisor District Four MICHAEL P. "MIKE" RYAN, Supervisor District Five On behalf of the San Luis Obispo County Board of Supervisors, I would like to express our appreciation for being invited to participate in the January 8 Joint Cities/County meeting. A majority of our Board has indicated that they will be in attendance in the capacity of a "Committee of the Whole." We welcome the opportunity to join in discussions on the various topics included on the agenda you forwarded to us. To this end, we have reviewed the agenda items and would like to offer the :following preliminary comments: A-1 A Joint Resolution Urging the State Legislature and the Governor t A r v Property Taxes. Board Comments: We believe it is important to be in sync with the actions being taken on a statewide basis by the League of California Cities(League) and the California State Association of Counties(CSAC). At the recently concluded CSAC Annual Meeting in San Mateo a report was given that CSAC and the League were jointly working on a common approach to this issue. More recently, we were informed that this common approach was further explored in a CSAC/League Joint Task Force on Revenue meeting in December(minutes attached). That meeting resulted in an -agreed upon approach to this issue which would focus on the state capping the property tax shift (ERAF), at a base year and returning the growth amount to local. government. The proposed resolution included in the material sent to us for the January 8 meeting does not RECEIVED include this element, i.e, returning the growth. Further, the proposed resolution calls upon the Governor and the Legislature to restore the property taxes to meet local .I AN 0 7 1997 needs such as public safety, building, and the maintenance of public facilities. Such language could lead to "earmarking" of funds which might be restored. The effort 81-0 CITY COUNCIL being undertaken by CSAC and the League contains no earmarking provisions and will urge the return of the growth amount as strictly discretionary revenue. We would recommend that our joint meeting endorse the noted effort by CSAC and the League rather that adopting the specific resolution included in the material. 1-07-1998 1:51AM FROM A-2. ,min& Federal Reeulation Coordination anelatiye to Flood Prevention. Board Comments: We would propose certain revisions in the resolution. To highlight these for you, we have included a strike out version, noting the revisions, and a full "clean copy." These revisions add certain clarification verbiage to note references to the "Clean Water, Act" and to a letter sent by Governor Wilson to President Clinton in October relative to avoiding a repeat of San Luis Obispo County's situation wherein we were approved for emergency work by numerous Federal and State agencies, only to be sued by the Environmental Protection Agency for having done the work without proper permits. The revision also 'proposes to substitute clarification language relative to the freedom of the Department of the Army "not to issue permits" with the highlighted language shown just above the strikeout -section. This new section also addresses the insufficiency of congressional funding to properly, implement the permit review process. Finally, in the first "BE IT RESOLVED" section, two minor additions are included to indicate that expedition of the permit process is needed especially during emergencies, and the necessary work also includes road systems. A-3 J int Resolution to Support The Lea ue gf California Qities.'_Campaign to Freeze th , State's Taking From Loc1 Funding Soprees. Board Comments: The memo from Mayor Novak of Morro Bay spoke to the general issue of fiscal stability. Attached to`the memo was a draft constitutional amendment put together by the League of California Cities tentatively entitled "Right to Fiscal Stability." The Mayor's memo recommends that: (1) the Cities and County support in concept the constitutional amendment to gain greater fiscal stability for local government; and (2) Each City and County individually support, by resolution, the final constitutional amendment package presented to the Legislature. This proposed constitutional amendment was also the subject of the recent CSAC/League Joint Task Force on Revenues. It was agreed at the meeting that the proposed amendment would he modified by the League to include the element of a cap on the growth of the property tax shift (ERAF). With this proviso, the proposed amendment would be jointly supported by the League and CSAC, as would CSAC's effort, noted above in Staff Comments associated with item A-1, to get that growth returned to local government. We would recommend our joint meeting conceptually support such an amendment, but based upon a unified effort by the County and Cities to support language as agreed upon by CSAC and the League of California Cities. P.-3 1-07-1993 1:52AM rKuM B-1 Electric Indus _ Dercg—u atiox .-: Informational Briefing on Options Facing . Governments. Board Comments: The thrust of this item calls for a consolidation of efforts by the Cities and Co which would encompass and maximize potential savings in the - purchase o electricity following deregulation. The County's General Services Departmew� is heading up our effort in this regard. In discussing this matter with the Gene- r-li Services Director we were informed that savings in electrical power costs will depend on several factors, and that at this time we do not have sufficient informatiion to determine if a solo joint Cities/County effort would result in an economy of scale sufficient to generate significant savings. It may take further aggregation with other units of government, such as the Association of Bay Area Governments (ABAG) or perhaps with the State. In this respect, certain coordination efforts have already bo initiated by the City Managers and the County Administrator, and more recently by SLOCOG. We are certainly in favor of exploring and enhancing this collabonVQ effort. On an "on -the -ground" basis, it would be helpful if the various Cities' departments charged with this effort contact and. coordinate their activities with tlac County General Services Department. Again, Mayor Carden, we look forward to Thursday's meeting, and to the potential of future §iw-1a meetings. In this latter regard, we believe it would be productive for such future meetings if Chairperson of the Board of Supervisors were included in the development of the agendas for �:T .e meetings. To this end I look forward to working with you and the other mayors to usher in a rocVv era of cooperation and coordination among our organizations. Sincerely, ^Z/ 4 MICHAEL P. "MIKE" RYAN, Chairman Board of Supervisors attachments cc: Each City Mayor c:wpwi nlwpdoo4� m rlcarden, Itrlmt P. A 1-07-1998 1:52AM FROM A JOINT RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCILS OF SAN LUIS OBISPO COUNTY AND THE COUNTY BOARD OF SUPERVISORS URGING THE CONGRESS OF THE UNITED STATES TO STREAMLINE THE PROCESS LOCAL AGENCIES MUCH FOLLOW TO OBTAIN PERMITS TO CONSTRUCT IMPROVEMENTS TO REPAIR DAMAGE CAUSED BY DISASTROUS FLOODING AND TO PROTECT IMPROVED AND UNIMPROVED WATERWAYS FROM FUTURE FLOOD DAMAGE WHEREAS, the Federal Government has adopted the National Environmental Policy Act Clean Water Act and the Endangered Species Act; and WHEREAS, the Federal Government did thereby assume regulatory authority over placement of fill and excavation of material from within all watemvays and wetlands and protection of biological organisms living within the waterways and wetlands; and WHEREAS, the Federal Government has defined all work to, in, on or within those waterways and wetlands to be under their jurisdiction; and WHEREAS, local agencies are thus required to obtain permission of the Federal Government prior to addressing the needs of their citizens; and WHEREAS,, the Federal Goyernment has spread the implementation of the National Environmental Policy Clean Water Act and Endangered Species Act among a myriad of agencies and under a myriad of regulations, and WHEREAS, the Federal Government has established the Department of the Interior and the Department of Commerce and assigned them the responsibility to protect certain wildlife; and WHEREAS, the Department of the Interior has not established gut'Jelines, for its assigned area of responsibility, that allow the local agency to address the needs of its citizens; and WHEREAS, the Department of Commerce has not established guidelines, for its assigned area of responsibility, that allow the local agency to address the needs of its citizens; and WHEREAS, the 'Department of Army is given authority to issue permits prior to any dredging or filling in waterways or wetlands, and has adopted certain Nationwide Permits; and WHEREAS, the Department of the Army has not issued permits or issued permits expeditiously for projects in accordance with either its 'Exemption or Natiorwide Permit system protocols, even though said projects are consistent with regulations under its authority, and WHEREAS, the Department of the Army has stated that Congress has not provided sufficient funds to properly implement the review process, and P. 5 1-07-1998 1-53AM FROM WHEREAS, the Environmental Protection Agency has the authority to direct the Department of the Army to restrict or reject a permit application; and WHEREAS, the current practice of issuing permits has not been effective in either protecting the environment or the citizens within urban areas due to internal Federal inconsistencies, missing communication, and non-existent coordination, and WHEREAS, Governor Pete Wilson in a letter addressed to President Clinton on October 6, 1997 urged that "A clearly stated policy is needed to avoid a repeat of San Luis Obispo County's situation, when the County had approval from numerous Federal and State Agencies for emergency work only to be sued by the Federal Environmental Protection Agency"; and WHEREAS, local agencies must prepare plans, conduct environmental studies and hearings to meet the already strict requirements of the State of California regarding protection of the environment; and WHEREAS, the local agency, with clear, concise Federal guidelines and adopted standards from the State of California, via its permitting process, could enforce the Federal .regulations thus enhancing the process and eliminating the confusion and frustration created by multiple Federal permitting agencies; and NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED by the City Councils -) the cities of San Luis Obispo County and the County Board of Supervisors that we urge the ?resident and Congress of the United State of America to move forthrightly and expeditiously to simplify the process of permitting, especially during emergencies, the work necessary in lakes, creeks, waterways, wetlands and to road systems by directing the agencies to adopt fair and equitable standards for use in California and delegate authority to the local agencies and to the State of California to follow those reasonable standards in the process of meeting the needs of their citizens in a way similar to the process the Department of Transportation established for implementation of the ISTEA program for the construction and maintenance of highw=ays. BE IT FUR'T'HER RESOLVED that the City Councils and the Board of Supervisors of San Luis Obispo County believe this matter is of great urgency for the units of local government and is of the highest public interest both to people residing within cities and counties and therefore, to the citizens of the United States. P. 8 1-07-1998 1:53AM FROM P•7 ' I ATTEST: City Clerk Mayor, City of Arroyo Grande ATTEST: City Clerk Mayor, City of Atascadero �Y ATTEST: City Clerk Mayor, City of Grover Beach ATTEST: City Clerk Mayor, City of Morro Bay ATTEST: City Clerk Mayor, City of Paso Robles �T ATTEST: City Clerk Mayor, City of Pismo Beach ATTEST: City Clerk Mayor, City -of San Luis Obispo ATTEST: County Clerk Chair, County Board -of Supervisors 1-07-1995 1:5AAM FROM P.5 A JOINT RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCILS OF SAN LUIS OBISPO COUNTY AND THE COUNTY BOARD OF SUPERVISORS URGING THE CONGRESS OF THE UNITED STATES TO STREAMLINE THE PROCESS LOCAL AGENCIES MUCH FOLLOW TO OBTAIN PERMITS TO CONSTRUCT IMPROVEMENTS TO REPAIR DAMAGE CAUSED BY DISASTROUS FLOODING AND.TO PROTECT IMPROVED AND UNIMPROVED WATERWAYS FROM FUTURE FLOOD DAMAGE WHEREAS, the Federal Government has adopted the National Environmental Policy Act C `#i ::k r and the Endangered Species Act; and WHEREAS, the Federal Government did thereby assume regulatory authority over placement of -fill and excavation of material from within all waterways and wetlands and protection of biological organisms living within the waterways and wetlands; and WHEREAS, the Federal Government has defined all work to, in, on or. within those waterways and wetlands to be under their jurisdiction; and WHEREAS, local agencies are thus required to obtain permission of the Federal - Government prior to addressing the needs of their citizens; and WHEREAS, the Federal Government has spread the implementation of the National Environmental Policy $ # A.." and Endangered Species Act among a myriad of agencies and under a myriad of regulations; and WHEREAS, the Federal Government has established the Department of the Interior and the Department of Commerce and mignmenti�s'[ them the responsibility to protect cerrain wildlife; and WHEREAS, the Department of the interior has not established guidelines, for its assigned area of responsibility, that allow the local agency to address the needs of its citizens; and WHEREAS, the Department of Commerce has not established guidelines, for its assigned area of responsibility, that allow the local agency to address the needs of its citizens; and WHEREAS, the Department of Army is given authority to issue permits prior to any dredging or filling in waterways or wetlands, and has adopted certain Nationwide Permits; and �•x max«,.• :� >,>: ::. 1-9100 �ti:vn..,,� .,vmn.,. Nw,..., w,� . �•,,:.r`- •* '!S �.aT-'ry• b �R,..., etaN,'ii ,or 1-07-1998 1.55AM FROM P•9 Al �uss,frSylr:%WfI'fa :AK■nlrirl yI I ti40r<r4T�.raeu• . . . _ ! ■ ■ 'A7l`f■ftA�ly■E114ll111 ■ ! WHEREAS, the Environmental Protection Agency has the authority to direct the Department of the Arany to restrict or reject a permit application; and WHEREAS, the current practice of issuing permits has not been effective in either protecting the environment or the citizens within urban areas due to internzl.l Federal inconsistencies, missing communication, and non-existent coordination; and •x.. S mg, �., .. ON ME I AIR WHEREAS, local agencies must prepare plans, conduct environmental studies and hearings to meet the already strict requirements of the State of California regarding protection of the environment; and WHEREAS, the local agency, with clear, concise Federal guidelines and adopted standards from the State of California, via its permitting process, could enforce the Federal regulations thus enhancing the process and eliminating the confusion and frustration created by multiple Federal permitting agencies; and NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED by the City Councils of the cities of San Luis Obispo County and the County Board of Supervisors that we urge the President and Congress of the United State of America to move forthrightly and expeditiously to simplify the process of permittinY;asp ei'di>K kerne the work necessary in lakes, creeks, waterways, ,andwetlands ic`:'c'rta'>St;i by directing the agencies to adopt fair and equitable standards for use in California and delegate authority to the local agencies and to the State of California to follow those reasonable standards in the process of meeting the needs of their citizens in a way similar to the process the Department of Transportation established for implementation of the ISTEA program for the construction and maintenan ;e of highways. BE iT )FURTHER RESOLVED that the City Councils and the Board of Supervisors of San Luis Obispo County believe this matter is of great urgency for the units of local government and is of the highest public interest both to people residing within cities and counties and therefore, to the citizens of the United States. 1-07-1995 1:55AM FROM ATTEST. - City Clerk ATTEST: City Clerk ATTEST: City.Clerk ATTEST: City Clerk ATTEST: Mayor, City of Arroyo Grande Mayor, City of Atascadero Mayor, City of Grover Beach Mayor, City of Morro Bay City Clerk Mayor, City of Paso Robles ATTEST: City Clerk Mayor, City of Pismo Beach ATTEST: City Clerk Mayor, City of San Luis Obispo ATTEST: County Clerk Chair, County Board of Supervisors P. 10 January 6, 1998 MEMORANDUM TO: Mayor Allen K. Settle MEETING AGENDA DATE ITEM # -- r� FROM: Council Member Dave Romero "� SUBJECT: Joint Cities/County meeting proposed resolution regarding restoration of property taxes. I have the following minor suggestions for rewording this resolution (attached): Eliminate wording in the title after "Counties" and substitute wording "to be used for local government needs." My reason for this is that if we mention specific programs such as public safety or public works, there may be strings attached. I believe we are better off with the more generic term of "local government needs." The same reasoning would apply to another suggested change under the heading "NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED," I would suggest we eliminate the wording "such as Public safety and public works construction." DR:ss Attachment tom; , ❑ W") �- C3�d[L� ❑ Fli ❑ ATTDR�fEY ❑ttER&OR10 0_M T RM LICE CIiF O RTC DIR C3' ❑ UTIL DIR 13 O PERS DIR ITEM #A-1 A JOINT RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCILS OF SAN LUIS OHISPO COUNTY AND THE COUNTY BOARD OF SUPERVISORS URGING THE STATE LEGISLATURE AND THE GOVERNOR TO APPROVE RESTORING PROPERTY TAXES PREVIOUSLY TAKEN AWAY FROM THE CITIES AND COUNTIES-A-NH-,MjTM0R17JN0 6IRESTORED-M3PERTY=F�Eg D'L��,IE�,I-T-IdEED� eI I "P1jBile SAf.E�'� �tNI?-1 �il3i1`O QR TO BE USED FOR LOCAL GOVERNMENT NEEDS K WHEREAS, the State of California, in order to deal with their own budgetary shortfalls, took property tax revenue away from general purpose local government units (counties and cities) in fiIscal years 1992 through 1994, and WHEREAS, since that time most units of local government have had a very difficult time delivering services to their citizens, including public safety and building and maintainin neede public facilities because of this loss of revenue, and g d WHEREAS, most local government jurisdictions have also had a very difficult time constructing and maintaining their street and road systems due to insufficient funding for this Purpose, and WHEREAS, most units of local government have had to use available general funds for critically needed public services such as police and fire, which has resulted in the neglect of maintaining our public facilities and infrastructure and, in doing so, has contributed to a deteriorated condition of our streets and roads, and WHEREAS, units of California local government will continue to see the further deterioration of their facilities and infrastructure and, particularly, streets and roads, unless additional funds are made available for this purpose. NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED by the City Councils of the cities of San Luis Obispo County and the County Board of Supervisors that we urge the Governor and the Legislature of the State of California to move forthrightly and expeditiously to restoretrro er taxes previously taken from the cities and counties to meet local needs suer ag i' p p ty ptrbli�worRa eoms ruetioti�d•ma�irrteffame, and p resa€etga BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED that the City Councils and the Board of Supervisors of San Luis Obispo County believe this matter is of great urgency for the units of localovernment pd is of the highest public interest both to people residing within cities and counties a nd therefore, to the citizens of the State of California. 000t.- BOARD OF SUPERVISORS COUNTY GOVERNMENT CENTER, Room 370 • SAN LUIS OBISPO, CALIFORNIA 93408-2040 • 805.781.5450 January 6, 1998 Mayor Harold L. Carden III City of Atascadero 6500 Palma Ave. Atascadero, CA 93422 Dear Mayor Carden: HARRY L. OVITT, Supervisor District One LAURENCE L. LAURENT, Supervisor District Two PEG PINARD, Supervisor District Three RUTH E. BRACKETT, Supervisor District Four MICHAEL P. "MIKE" RYAN, Supervisor District Five On behalf of the San Luis Obispo County Board of Supervisors, I would like to express our appreciation for being invited to participate in the January 8 Joint Cities/County meeting. A majority of our Board has indicated that they will be in attendance in the capacity of a "Committee of the Whole." We welcome the opportunity to join in discussions on the various topics included on the agenda you forwarded to us. To this end, we have reviewed the agenda items and would like to offer the following preliminary comments: A-1 A Joint Resolution Urging the State Legislature and the Governor to Approve Restoring, o f' Property Taxes. Board Comments: We believe it is important to be in sync with the actions being taken on a statewide basis by the League of California Cities(League) and the California State Association of Counties(CSAC). At the recently concluded CSAC Annual Meeting in San Mateo a report was given that CSAC and the League were jointly working on a common approach to this issue. More recently, we were informed that this common approach was further explored in a CSAC/League Joint Task Force on Revenue meeting in December(minutes attached). That meeting resulted in an agreed upon approach to this issue which would focus on the state capping the property tax shift (ERAF) at a base year and returning the growth amount to local government. The proposed resolution included in the material sent to us for the January 8 meeting does not include this element, i.e. returning the growth. Further, the proposed resolution calls upon the Governor and the Legislature to restore the property taxes to meet local needs such as public safety, building, and the maintenance of public facilities. Such language could lead to "earmarking" of funds which might be restored. The effort being undertaken by CSAC and the League contains no earmarking provisions and will urge the return of the growth amount as strictly discretionary revenue. We would recommend that our joint meeting endorse the noted effort by CSAC and the League rather that adopting the specific resolution included in the material. A-2 A Joint Resolution Concernin Federal Re =ulation Coordination and Permitting Relative to Flood Prevention. Board Comments: We would propose certain revisions in the resolution. To highlight these for you, we have included a strike out version, noting the revisions, and a full "clean copy." These revisions add certain clarification verbiage to note references to the "Clean Water Act" and to a letter sent by Governor Wilson to President Clinton in October relative to avoiding a repeat of San Luis Obispo County's situation wherein we were approved for emergency work by numerous Federal and State agencies, only to be sued by the Environmental Protection Agency for having done the work without proper permits. The revision also proposes to substitute clarification language relative to the freedom of the Department of the Army "not to issue permits" with the highlighted language shown just above the strikeout section. This new section also addresses the insufficiency of congressional funding to properly implement the permit review process. Finally, in the first `BE IT RESOLVED" section, two minor additions are included to indicate that expedition of the permit process is needed especially during emergencies, and the necessary work also includes road systems. A-3 A Joint Resolution to Support The League of California Cities' Campaign to Freeze the State's Taking From Local Funding- Sources. Board Comments: The memo from Mayor Novak of Morro Bay spoke to the general issue of fiscal stability. Attached to the memo was a draft constitutional amendment put together by the League of California Cities tentatively entitled "Right to Fiscal Stability." The Mayor's memo recommends that: (1) the Cities and County support in concept the constitutional amendment to gain greater fiscal stability for local government; and (2) Each City and County individually support, by resolution, the final constitutional amendment package presented to the Legislature. This proposed constitutional amendment was also the subject of the recent CSAC/League Joint Task Force on Revenues. It was agreed at the meeting that the proposed amendment would be modified by the League to include the element of a cap on the growth of the property tax shift (ERAF). With this proviso, the proposed amendment would be jointly supported by the League and CSAC, as would CSAC's effort, noted above in Staff Comments associated with item A-1, to get that growth returned to local government. We would recommend our joint meeting conceptually support such an amendment, but based upon a unified effort by the County and Cities to support language as agreed upon by CSAC and the League of California Cities. B-1 Electric Industry Deregulation: An Informational Bricfing oi-i Options Facing Local Governments. Board Comments: The thrust of this item calls for a consolidation of efforts by the Cities and County which would encompass and maximize potential savings in the purchase of electricity following deregulation. The County's General Services Department is heading up our effort in this regard. In discussing this matter with the General Services Director we were informed that savings in electrical power costs will depend on several factors, and that at this time we do not have sufficient information to determine if a solo joint Cities/County effort would result in an economy of scale sufficient to generate significant savings. It may take further aggregation with other units of government, such as the Association of Bay Area Governments (ABAG) or perhaps with the State. In this respect, certain coordination efforts have already been initiated by the City Managers and the County Administrator, and more recently by SLOCOG. We are certainly in favor of exploring and enhancing this collaborative effort. On an "on -the -ground" basis, it would be helpful if the various Cities' departments charged with this effort contact and coordinate their activities with the County General Services Department. Again, Mayor Carden, we look forward to Thursday's meeting, and to the potential of future such meetings. In this latter regard, we believe it would be productive for such future meetings if the Chairperson of the Board of Supervisors were included in the development of the agendas for the meetings. To this end I look forward to working with you and the other mayors to usher in a new era of cooperation and coordination among our organizations. Sincerely, 116 113 L MICHAEL P. "MIKE" RYAN, Chairman Board of Supervisors attachments cc: Each City Mayor awpwin\wpdocs\m r\carden.Itr/mI t �~l A JOINT RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCILS OF SAN LUIS OBISPO COUNTY AND THE COUNTY BOARD OF SUPERVISORS URGING THE CONGRESS OF THE UNITED STATES TO STREAMLINE THE PROCESS LOCAL AGENCIES MUCH FOLLOW TO OBTAIN PERMITS TO CONSTRUCT IMPROVEMENTS TO REPAIR DAMAGE CAUSED BY DISASTROUS FLOODING AND TO PROTECT IMPROVED AND UNIMPROVED WATERWAYS FROM FUTURE FLOOD DAMAGE WHEREAS, the Federal Government has adopted the National Environmental Policy Act Clean Water Act and the Endangered Species Act; and WHEREAS, the Federal Government did thereby assume regulatory authority over placement of fill and excavation of material from within all waterways and wetlands and protection of biological organisms living within the waterways and wetlands; and WHEREAS, the Federal Government has defined all work to, in, on or within those waterways and wetlands to be under their jurisdiction; and WHEREAS, local agencies are thus required to obtain permission of the Federal Government prior to addressing the needs of their citizens; and WHEREAS, the Federal Government has spread the implementation of the National Environmental Policy Clean Water Act and Endangered Species Act among a myriad of agencies and under a myriad of regulations; and WHEREAS, the Federal Government has established the Department of the Interior and the Department of Commerce and assigned them the responsibility to protect certain wildlife; and WHEREAS, the Department of the Interior has not established guraelines, for its assigned area of responsibility, that allow the local agency to address the needs of its citizens; and WHEREAS, the Department of Commerce has not established guidelines, for its assigned area of responsibility, that allow the local agency to address the needs of its citizens; and WHEREAS, the Department of Army is given authority to issue permits prior to any dredging or filling in waterways or wetlands, and has adopted certain Nationwide Permits; and WHEREAS, the Department of the Army has not issued permits or issued permits expeditiously for projects in accordance with either its Exemption or Natiorv'ide Permit system protocols, even though said projects are consistent with regulations under its authority, and WHEREAS, the Department of the Army has stated that Congress has not provided sufficient funds to properly implement the review process, and WHEREAS, the Environmental Protection Agency has the authority to direct the Department of the Army to restrict or reject a permit application; and WHEREAS, the current practice of issuing permits has not been effective in either protecting the environment or the citizens within urban areas due to internal Federal inconsistencies, missing communication, and non-existent coordination; and WHEREAS, Governor Pete Wilson in a letter addressed to President Clinton on October 6, 1997 urged that "A clearly stated policy is needed to avoid a repeat of can Luis Obispo County's situation, when the County had approval from numerous Federal and State Agencies for emergency work only to be sued by the Federal Environmental Protection Agency"; and WHEREAS, local agencies must prepare plans, conduct environmental studies and hearings to meet the already strict requirements of the State of California regarding protection of the environment; and WHEREAS, the local agency, with clear, concise Federal guidelines and adopted standards from the State of California, via its permitting process, could enforce the Federal regulations thus enhancing the process and eliminating the confusion and frustration created by multiple Federal permitting agencies; and NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED by the City Councils -)f the cities of San Luis Obispo County and the County Board of Supervisors that we urge th,; ?resident and Congress of the United State of America to move forthrightly and expeditiously to simplify the process of permitting, especially during emergencies, the work necessary in lakes, creeks, waterways, wetlands and to road systems by directing the agencies to adopt fair and equitable standards for use in California and delegate authority to the local agencies and to the State of California to follow those reasonable standards in the process of meeting the needs of their citizens in a way similar to the process the Department of Transportation established for implementation of the ISTEA program for the construction and maintenanc-, of highways. BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED that the City Councils and the Board of Supervisors of San Luis Obispo County believe this matter is of great urgency for the units of local government and is of the highest public interest both to people residing within cities and counties and therefore, to the citizens of the United States. ATTEST: City Clerk ATTEST: City Clerk ATTEST: City Clerk ATTEST: City Clerk ATTEST: City Clerk ATTEST: City Clerk ATTEST: City Clerk ATTEST. County Clerk Mayor, City of Arroyo Grandc Mayor, City of Atascadero Mayor, City of Grover Beach Mayor, City of Morro Bay Mayor, City of Paso Robles Mayor, City of Pismo Beach Mayor, City of San Luis Obispo Chair, County Board of Supervisors A JOINT RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCILS OF SAN LUIS OBISPO COUNTY AND THE COUNTY BOARD OF SUPERVISORS URGING THE CONGRESS OF THE UNITED STATES TO STREAMLINE THE PROCESS LOCAL AGENCIES MUCH FOLLOW TO OBTAIN PERMITS TO CONSTRUCT IMPROVEMENTS TO REPAIR DAMAGE CAUSED BY DISASTROUS FLOODING AND TO PROTECT IMPROVED AND UNIMPROVED WATERWAYS FROM FUTURE FLOOD DAMAGE WHEREAS, the Federal Government has adopted the National Environmental Policy Act C''C :at:er'*d and the Endangered Species Act; and WHEREAS, the Federal Government did thereby assume regulatory authority over placement of fill and excavation of material from within all waterways and wetlands and protection of biological organisms living within the waterways and wetlands-, and WHEREAS, the Federal Government has defined all work to, in, on or within those waterways and wetlands to be under their jurisdiction-, and WHEREAS, local agencies are thus required to obtain permission of the Federal Government prior to addressing the needs of their citizens; and WHEREAS, the Federal Government has spread the implementation of the National Environmental Policy .Cleat :Wa.:t. Aet and Endangered Species Act among a myriad of agencies and under a myriad of regulations-, and WHEREAS, the Federal Government has established the Department of the Interior and the Department of Commerce and assignmentassigned them the responsibility to protect certain wildlife; and WHEREAS, the Department of the Interior has not established guidelines, for its assigned area of responsibility, that allow the local agency to address the needs of its citizens; and WHEREAS, the Department of Commerce has not established guidelines, for its assigned area of responsibility, that allow the local agency to address the needs of its citizens; and WHEREAS, the Department of Army is given authority to issue permits prior to any dredging or filling in waterways or wetlands, and has adopted certain Nationwide Permits-, and WHEREAS, the Department Of the flrmy has not issued permits or issued per il$ expel tiausly;forprojects ir .accordan ,e w tli:e ther its Exeznptton o Nabo.nwtde;Permitsystem pro>ocols,'even though said projects are consistent with reetIatior s under its authority; and WHEREAS; the Department.ofthe Army has stated that Congress "1as::not provided su w' went if ds to properly>implemeilt;the review process, and S, the -Depaa t-nrentvfthe-Army-has-the-freedzmrto-riot-issue-permits--foli- wing their own -Nationwide -Pei -in t-systenr,-even-lmcrgfithat-might-l"-in'temally-consistent-with- is iniplement-mations-urracr-itsauffimity, and WHEREAS, the Environmental Protection Agency has the authority to direct the Department of the Army to restrict or reject a permit application, and WHEREAS, the current practice of issuing permits has not been effective in either protecting the environment or the citizens within urban areas due to interni4 Federal inconsistencies, missing communication, and non-existent coordination; and VVff AS Crovernor;Pete witson in<a letter addressed tt President Cli o_n on Oeteb.er 6; I997`urd that "A clearly stated polity is needetf to avoid a To of San Luis Obispp unty's sttuton when the County h.ad approval fcon ttunervus :Federal and State agencies for emergency work only to be sued by the Federal Environmental Protection Agency%' and WHEREAS, local agencies must prepare plans, conduct environmental studies and hearings to meet the already strict requirements of the State of California regarding protection of the environment; and WHEREAS, the local agency, with clear, concise Federal guidelines and adopted standards from the State of California, via its permitting process, could enforce the Federal regulations thus enhancing the process and eliminating the confusion and frustration created by multiple Federal permitting agencies; and NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED by the City Councils of the cities of San Luis Obispo County and the County Board of Supervisors that we urge the President and Congress of the United State of America to move forthrightly and expeditiously to simplify the process of permitting, espeeiatly during emergencies; the work necessary in lakes, creeks, waterways, andwetlands and to road systems by directing the agencies to adopt fair and equitable standards for use in California and delegate authority to the local agencies and to the State of California to follow those reasonable standards in the process of meeting the needs of their citizens in a way similar to the process the Department of Transportation established for implementation of the ISTEA program for the construction and maintenan,e of highways. BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED that the City Councils and the Board of Supervisors of San Luis Obispo County believe this matter is of great urgency for the units of local government and is of the highest public interest both to people residing within cities and counties and therefore, to the citizens of the United States. ATTEST: City Clerk ATTEST: City Clerk ATTEST: City Clerk ATTEST: City Clerk ATTEST: City Clerk ATTEST: City Clerk ATTEST: City Clerk ATTEST: County Clerk Mayor, City of Arroyo Grande Mayor, City of Atascadero Mayor, City of Grover Beach Mayor, City of Morro Bay Mayor, City of Paso Robles Mayor, City of Pismo Beach Mayor, City of San Luis Obispo Chair, County Board of Supervisors 111 L.f+it11%A, 9-%+ •* '-,-07-1998 1 = 51 AM FROM DATE /- `9 -49' ITEM #201 A r : P. 2 BOARD OF SUPERVISORS COUNTY GOVERNMENT CENTER, Room 370 • SAN LUIS OBISPO, CALIFORNIA 93408-2040 • 805.731.5450 January 6, 1998 M -C CIL ❑ CDD DIR 13 O 0 -Fr DIR GAO ❑,PRE CHIEF ® ATTORNEY 0 PW DIR 93-tLERKIORIQ [3 POLICE CHF p MG IN [3 REG DIR ❑ UTIL DIR p E3 PERS DIR Mayor Harold L. Carden III City of Atascadero 6500 Palma Ave. Atascadero, CA 93422 Dear Mayor Carden: HARRY L. OVITT, Supervisor District One L!iURMWE L. LAURENT, Supervisor Diatrict Two PEG PINARD. Supervisor Disrricr Three RUTH E. BRACKETT, Supervisor•Distrier Four MICHAEL P. "MIKE" RYAN, Supervisor District Five On behalf of the San Luis Obispo County Board of Supervisors, I would like to express our appreciation for being invited to participate in the January 8 Joint Cities/County meeting. A majority of our Board has indicated that they will be in attendance in the capacity of a "Committee of the Whole." We welcome the opportunity to join in discussions on the various topics included on the agenda you forwarded to us. To this end, we have reviewed the agenda items and would like to offer the :following preliminary comments: A-1 A Joint Resolution Urging the State Legislature and the Governor tp-Approvc Rutori'_ng of PrgperM Taxes I Board Comments: We believe it is important to be in sync with the actions being taken on a statewide basis by the League of California Cities(League) and the California State Association of COunties(CSAC). At the recently concluded CSAC Annual Meeting in San Mateo a report was given that CSAC and the League were jointly working on a common approach to this issue. More recently, we were informed that this common approach was further explored in a CSAC/League Joint Task Force on Revenue meeting in December(minutes attached). That meeting resulted in an -agreed upon approach to this issue which would focus on the state capping the property tax shift (ERAF). at a base year and returning the growth amount to local, government. The proposed resolution included in the material sent to us for the January 8 meeting does not RECEIVED include this element, i.e. returning the growth. Further, the proposed resolution calls upon the Governor and the Legislature to restore the property taxes to meet local ,IAN U % 1997 needs such as public safety, building, and the maintenance of public facilities. Such language could lead to "earmarking" of funds which might be restored. The effort 81-0 CITY COUNCIL being undertaken by CSAC and the League contains no earmarking provisions and will urge the return of the growth amount as strictly discretionary revenue. We would recommend that aur joint meeting endorse the -noted effort by CSAC and the League rather that adopting the specific resolution included in the material. 1-07-1998 1:51AM FRS" A.2 Algj= Bgqolujigri C2ncemingFederal Regulation CogLdJiaaftqn and PermittiXgg-Relative to Flood Prevention, Board Comments: We would propose certain revisions in the resolution. To highlight these for you, we have included a strike out version, noting the revisions, and a full "clean copy." These revisions add certain clarification verbiage to note references to the "Clean Water Act" and to a letter sent by Governor Wilson to President Clinton in October relative to avoiding a repeat of San Luis Obispo County's situation wherein we were approved for emergency work by numerous Federal and State agencies, only to be sued by the Environmental Protection Agency for having done the work without proper permits. The revision also proposes to substitute clarification language relative to the freedom of the Department of the Army "not to issue permits" with the highlighted language shown just above the strikeoutsection. This new section also addresses the insufficiency of congressional funding to properly. implement the permit review process. Finally, in the first "BE IT RESOLVED" section, two minor additions are included to indicate that expedition of the permit process is needed especially during emergencies, and the necessary work also includes road systems. A-3 A J ini Resolution to Su ort The League of Califania Cilks'am ai n to Freeze th State's Taking From Localfup&az Swrces. Board Comments: The memo from Mayor Novak of Morro Bay spoke to the general issue of fiscal stability. Attached to'the memo was a draft constitutional amendment put together by the League of California Cities tentatively entitled '`Right to Fiscal Stability." The Mayor's memo recommends that: (1) the Cities and County support in concept the constitutional amendment to gain greater fiscal stability for local government; and (2) Each City and County individually support, by resolution, the final constitutional amendment package presented to the Legislature. This proposed constitutional amendment was also the subject of the recent CSAC/League Joint Task Force on Revenues. It was agreed at the meeting that the proposed amendment would be modified by the League to include the element of a cap on the growth of the property tax shift (ERAF). With this proviso, the proposed amendment would -be jointly supported by the League and CSAC, as would CSAC's effort, noted above in Staff Comments associated with item A-1, to get that growth returned to local government. We would recommend our joint meeting conceptually support such an amendment, but based upon a unified effort by the County and Cities to support language as agreed upon by CSAC and the League of California Cities. ,-' 1 —07-1998 1 : 52AM FRO 41 Do d B-1 electric Indust y_Der_g afo� n _Informational Briefing on Qptiony Fj1cing Lost Cnvernments. Board Comments: The thrust of this item calls for a consolidation of efforts by the Cities and Cow which would encompass and maximize potential savings in the • purchase of electricity following deregulation. The County's General Services Departrneaas is heading up our effort in this regard. In discussing this matter with the Gencml Services Director we were informed that savings in electrical power costs will depend on several factors, and that at this time we do not have sufficient information to determine if a solo joint Cities/County effort would result in an economy of scale sufficient to generate significant savings. It may take further aggregation with other units of government, such as the Association of Bay Area Governments (ABAG) or perhaps with the State. In this respect, certain coordination efforts have already initiated by the City Managers and the County Administrator, and more recently by SLOCOG. We are certainly in favor of exploring and enhancing this collaboraVQ effort. On an "on -the -ground" basis, it would be helpful if the various Cities' departments charged with this effort contact and. coordinate their activities with',_(-. e County General Services Department. Again, Mayor Carden, we look forward to Thursday's meeting, and to the potential of future su-c-h meetings. In this latter regard, we believe it would be productive for such future meetings if Uie Chairperson of the Board of Supervisors were included in the development of the agendas for th.e meetings. To this end I look forwaid to working with you and the other mayors to usher in a nP",v era of cooperation and coordination among our organizations. Sincerely, ' MICHAEL P. "MIKE" RYAN, Chairman Board of Supervisors 0 attachments cc: Each City Mayor c:wpwin%wpdocslm rlcarden,nrlml 1-07-1998 1:52AM FF -'l A JOINT RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCILS OF SAN LUIS OBISPO COUNTY AND THE COUNTY BOARD OF SUPERVISORS URGING THE CONGRESS OF THE UNITED STATES TO STREAMLINE THE PROCESS LOCAL AGENCIES MUCII FOLLOW TO OBTAIN PERMITS TO CONSTRUCT IMPROVEMENTS TO REPAIR DAMAGE CAUSED BY DISASTROUSFLOODING AND TO PROTECT IMPROVED AND UNIMPROVED WATERWAYS FROM FUTURE FLOOD DAMAGE WHEREAS, the Federal Government has adopted the National Environmental Policy Act Clean Water Act and the Endangered Species Act, and WHEREAS, the Federal Government did thereby assume regulatory authority over placement of fill and excavation of material from within all waterways and wetlands and protection of biological organisms living within the waterways and wetlan:is, and WHEREAS, the Federal Government has defined all work to, in, on or within those waterways and wetlands to be under their jurisdiction; and WHEREAS, local agencies are thus required to obtain permission of the Federal Government prior to addressing the needs of their citizens; and WHEREAS,, the Federal Goyernment has, spread the implementation of the National Environmental Policy Clean Water Act and Endangered Species Act among a myriad of agencies and under a myriad of regulations; and WHEREAS, the Federal Government has established the Department of the Interior and the Department of Commerce and assigned them the responsibility to protect certain wildlife; and WHEREAS, the Department of the Interior has not established gui relines, for its assigned area of responsibility, that allow the local agency to address the needs of its citizens; and WHEREAS, the Department of Commerce has not established guidelines, for its assigned area of responsibility, that allow the local agency to address the needs of its citizens; and WHEREAS, the Department of Army is given authority to issue permits prior to any dredging or filling in waterways or wetlands, and has adopted certain Nationwide Permits; and WHEREAS, the Department of the Army has not issued permits or issued permits expeditiously for projects in accordance with either its Exemption or Natior:wide Permit system protocols, even though said projects are consistent with regulations under its authority, and WHEREAS, the Department of the Army has stated that Congress has not provided sufficient funds to properly implement the review process, and P. 5 `-,1-07-1998 1 : 53AM FF,nM P. 6 e . WHEREAS, the Environmental Protection Agency has the authority to direct the Department of the Army to restrict or reject a permit application; and WHEREAS, the current practice of issuing permits has not been effective in either protecting the environment or the citizens within urban areas due to internal Federal inconsistencies, missing communication, and non-existent coordination; and WHEREAS, Governor Pete Wilson in a letter addressed to President Clinton on October 6, 1997 urged that "A clearly stated policy is needed to avoid a repeat of San Luis Obispo County's situation, when the County had approval from numerous Federal and State Agencies for emergency work only to be sued by the Federal Environmental Protection Agency"; and WfIE.REAS, local agencies must prepare plans, conduct environmental studies and hearings to meet the already strict requirements of the State of California regarding protection of the environment; and WHEREAS, the local agency, with clear, concise Federal guidelines and adopted standards from the State of California, via its permitting process, could enforce the Federal regulations thus enhancing the process and eliminating the confusion and frustration created by multiple Federal permitting agencies; and NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED by the City Councils -)'the cities of San Luis Obispo County and the County Board of Supervisors that we urge the ?resident and Congress of the United State of America to move forthrightly and expeditiously to simplify the process of permitting, especially during emergencies, the work necessary in lakes, creeks, waterways, wetlands and to road systems by directing the agencies to adopt fair and equitable standards for use in California and delegate authority to the local agencies and to the State of California to follow those reasonable standards in the process of meeting the needs of their citizens in a way similar to the process the Department of Transportation established for implementation of the ISTEA program for the construction and maintenance of highways. BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED that the City Councils and the Board of Supervisors of San Luis Obispo County believe this matter is of great urgency for the units of local government and is of the highest public interest both to people residing within cities and counties and therefore, to the citizens of the United States. 1-07-1998 1:S3AM FpnM ATTEST: City Clerk ATTEST: City Clerk ATTEST: City Clerk ATTEST: City Clerk ATTEST: City Clerk ATTEST: Mayor, City of Arroyo Grande Mayor, City of Atascadero Mayor, City of Grover Beach Mayor, City of Morro Bay Mayor, City of Paso Robles City Clerk Mayor, City of Pismo Beach ATTEST: City Clerk Mayor, City -of San Luis Obispo ATTEST: County Clerk Chair, County Board'of Supervisors 0.7 ",1-07-1998 1:SAAM FpnM A JOINT RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCILS OF SAN LUIS OBISPO COUNTY AND THE COUNTY BOARD OF SUPERVISORS URGING THE CONGRESS OF THE UNITED STATES TO STREAMLINE THE PROCESS LOCAL AGENCIES MUCH FOLLOW TO OBTAIN PERMITS TO CONSTRUCT IMPROVEMENTS TO REPAIR DAMAGE CAUSED BY DISASTROUS FLOODING AND.TO PROTECT IMPROVED AND UNIMPROVED WATERWAYS FROM FUTURE FLOOD DAMAGE WHEREAS, the Federal Government has adopted the National Environmental Policy Act and the Endangered Species Act; and WHEREAS, the Federal Government did thereby assume regulatory authority over placement of -fill and excavation of material from within all waterways and wetlands and protection of biological organisms living within the waterways and wetlands; and WHEREAS, the Federal Government has defined all work to, in, on or within those waterways and wetlands to be under their jurisdiction; and WHEREAS, local agencies are thus required to obtain permission of the Federal Government prior to addressing the needs of their citizens; and WHEREAS, the Federal Government has spread the implementation of the National Environmental Policy VISN ",G� and Endangered Species Act among a myriad of agencies and under a myriad of regulations, and WHEREAS, the Federal Government has established the Department of the Interior and ..................... the Department of Commerce and assignmenta;,s d them the responsibility to protect ceiiain wildlife; and WHEREAS, the Department of the ;interior has not established guidelines, for its assigned area of responsibility, that allow the local agency to address the needs of its citizens; and WHEREAS, the Department of Commerce has not established guidelines, for its assigned area of responsibility, that allow the local agency to address the needs of its citizens; and WHEREAS,'the Department of Army is given authority to issue permits prior to any dredging or filling in waterways or wetlands, and has adopted certain Nationwide Permits; and ����� � ^ .... ... r mak; � ^> •� �. �:�;.. �. ,•aa�. � P. 8 P. 9 1-07-1998 1.55AM FP^M ■ � D■ ■ ■ • ■ w a r • •r a • .nuf - - - . i7CS�.'CCfQL1LYl1'� ullvLl tL.7 cr.ua�avi tai, . WHEREAS, the Environmental Protection Agency has the authority to direct the Department of the Arany to restrict or reject a permit application; and WHEREAS, the current practice of issuing permits has not been effective in either protecting the environment or the citizens within urban areas due to intern'zq Federal inconsistencies, missing communication, and non-existent coordination; and its I - - =7 �-M M"`V_0,V iWN .,- ,v� WHEREAS, local agencies must prepare plans, conduct environmental studies and hearings to meet the already strict requirements of the State of California regarding protection of the environment; and WHEREAS, the local agency, with clear, concise Federal guidelines and adopted standards from the State of California, via its permitting process, could enforce the Federal regulations thus enhancing the process and eliminating the confusion and frustration created by multiple Federal permitting agencies; and NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED by the City Councils of the cities of San Luis Obispo County and the County Board of Supervisors that we urge the President and Congress of the United State of America to move forthrightly and expeditiously to simplify the process of permitting' .ppald% rr ' ct the work necessary in lakes, creeks, waterways, .andwetlands ffiby directing the agencies to adopt fair and equitable standards for use in California and delegate authority to the local agencies and to the State of California to follow those reasonable standards in the process of meeting the needs of their citizens in a way similar to. the process the Department of Transportation established for implementation of the ISTEA program for the construction and maintenan ;e of highways. BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED that the City Councils and the Board of Supervisors of San Luis Obispo County believe this matter is of great urgency for thin units of local government and is of the highest public interest both to people residing within cities and counties and therefore, to the citizens of the United States. a'1-07-1993 1:55AM FROM ATTEST: City Clerk ATTEST: City Clerk ATTEST: City.Clerk ATTEST: City Clerk � y ATTEST: City Clerk .ATTEST: City Clerk ATTEST: City Clerk ATTEST: County Clerk Mayor, City of Arroyo Grande Mayor, City of Atascadero Mayor, City of Grover Beach Mayor, City of Morro Bay Mayor, City of Paso Robles Mayor, City of Pismo Beach Mayor, City of San Luis Obispo Chair, County Board of Supervisors FR' M City of Atascadero 805 461 0606__ 12-18-97 11:25AM TO SLO 7817109 0 Z ' 147�� `l❑ CITY OF -ATASC-ADFRO DATE: December 18, 1997 OFFICE of the CITY CLERK FAX TO YOU TO: All Mayors, City Managers, Chairpersons and County Administrator FROM: Marcia M. Torgerson City Clerk Phone #805-461-5074 FAX #805-461-0606 RE:- Special Joint Meeting PAGES: 4 The following is the final draft of the agenda for the 1/8/98 meeting. Please review and let me know today of any corrections needed as I will be mailing out the agenda packets tomorrow, Friday, December 19, 1997. I look forward to seeing you at the meeting. If you have any questions, please do not hesitate to contact me. PLEASE NOTE! THE DOCUMENTS ACCOMPANYING THIS PACSIMIGE TRANSMISSION MAY CONTAIN CONFIDENTIAL INFORMATION WHICH IS PRIVILEGED. THIS INFORM.4 TION I$ INTENDED ONLY FOR THE USE OF THE INDIVIDUAL OR ENTITY NAMED ABOVE. IF YOU ARE NOT THE INTENDED RECIPIENT OR THE FERSoN RESPONSIBLE FOR DELIVERING IT TO THE INTENDED RECIPIENT, YOU ARE HEREBY NOTIFIED THAT ANY DISCLOSURE, COPYING, DISTRIBUTION OR USE OFANY OF THE INFORMATION CONTAINED IN THIS TR,4NSMISSION IS STRICKLY PAOHISITiED. IF YOU HAVE RECEIVED THIS TRANSMISSION IN ERROR, PLEASE IM)WEDIATEL Y NOTIFY US BY TELEPHONE AND MAIL THE ORIGINAL TRANSMISSION TO US, THANK YOU, 6500 PALMA AVENUE o ATASCADERO, CA 93422 • (605) 461-5074 0 MOM City of Atascadero 805 461 06W- 12-18-97 11:25AM TO SLO 7817109 W P.2/4 AGENDA SPECIAL, JOINT MEETING OF THE CITY COUNCILS AND THE BOARD OF SUPERVISORS OF SAN LUIS OBISPO COUNTY (HOSTED BY THE CITYOFATASCADERO) Thursday, January 8, 1998 6:00 p.m. — Social Hour 7:00 p.m. = Regular Session Atascadero Lake' Park Pavilion 9315 Pismo Ave. Atascadero, California '""GENERAL INFORMATION*" Copies of the staff reports or other documentation relating to. each item of business referred to on the Agenda are on file in the office of the Atascadero City Clerk, 6500 Palma Ave., Suite 208, Atascadero and are available for public inspection during City Hall business hours. In compliance with the Americans with Disabilities Act, if you need special assistance to participate in this meeting, please contact the Atascadero City Clerk's office (805-461-5074). Notification at least 48 hours prior to the meeting will assist the City staff in assuring that reasonable arrangements can be made to provide accessibility to the meeting_ "SPECIAL MEETING PROTOCOL" ■ Atascadero Mayor, Harold L. Carden, 1II, will chair the meeting. • The business meeting will begin at 7:00 p.m. and adjourn no later than '11:00 p.m. ■ Public Comment will be limited to two minutes per speaker with a total of 16 minutes. • Due to the large number of City Councilmembers in attendance, Mayors and Councilmembers are respectfully requested to limit their commends and/or question's to two minutes. If a Mayor or Councilmember wishes to be recognized by the Chair, he or she may indicate so by raising their hand. • Staff presentations will be limited'to ten minutes. • Motions will need to be ratified by each Council. Mayor Carden will recognize each of the respective Mayors, who in turn will put the item to a vote of his/her Council. In order to facilitate this process, discussion by individual Councilmembers should be limited to it minimum due to the large number of elected officials present. SPECIAL JOINT MEETING: 7:00 P.M. CALL TO ORDER: Mayor Carden PLEDGE OF ALLEGIENCE: Boy'Scout Color Guard FktfM City of Atascadero 805 451 0606 12-18-97 11:25AM TO SLO 7817109 n47 P.3/4 ROLL CALL: QCE ro o Grande Cit? "taseadero City of Grover Beath Mayor A.K. "Pete " Dougall Mayor Harold L. Carden, III Mayor Dee Samos Michael Lady Ray Johnson Robert Reed Michael Fuller -George Luna Henry E. "Gene" Gai6iw Thomas A. Runels Jerry L. Clay, Sr. Peter Keith Steve Tolley Kenneth Lerno Ronald Arnoldsen City of Morro Bar City of Paso Robles City ofPismo Beach Mayor Cathy Novak Mayor Duane J. Plcanco Mayor John Brown Rodger Anderson Tom Baron Marion Mellow Dave Elliott Walter J. Macklin Hal Halldin William Peirce Lee Swanson Bill Rabenaldt Janice Peters Christian• E. Inversen Mary Ann Reiss City ofSan Luis Obispo Mayor Allen K Settle Bill Roalman Dave Romero Dodie Williams Kathy Smith APPROVAL OF AGENDA: Countv ofSan Luis Obisno Chairwoman Ruth Borckelt Harry L. Ovitt Bud Laurent Peg Pinard Mike Ryan COMMUNITY FORUM: This portibn of the meeting is reserved for persons wanting to address the City Councils and Board of Supervisors on any matter not on this agenda and over which the Councils and Supervisors have jurisdiction. Speakers are limited to two minutes per speaker with a total of 16 minutes. Please stale your name and address for 1he record before snaking your statement. A. ACTION ITEMS: A JOINT RESOLUTION URGING THE STATE LEGISLATURE AND THE GOVERNOR TO APPROVE RESTORING OF PROPERTY TAXG'S. [Robert Reed, Councilmember of Grover Beach, will give background] [Allen Settle, Mayor of San Luis Obispo, will give report and present resolution] Recommendation: Approve Joint Resolution. Time: 30 minutes 2. A JOINT RESOLUTION CONCERNING FEDERAL REGULATION _COORDINATION AND PERMIT WO RELATIVE TO FLOOD PREVENTION. [Allen Settle, Mayor of San Luis Obispo, will give report and present resolution] Recommendation: Time: 30 minutes Approve' Joint Resolution. 2 FROM City of Atascadero 805 461 0606__ 12-18-97 11:26AM TO SLO 7817109 v47 P.4/4 A RECOMMENDATION THAT THE CITIES AND COUNTY SUPPORT IN ' CONCEPT THE CONST1121T%ANAL AMENDMENT TOGAIN GREATER FISCAL STABILITY FOR LOCAL GOVERNMENT. [Cathy Novak, Mayor of Morro Bay, will give report] Recommendations: 1. The Cities and County support in concept the constitutional amendment. 2. Each City and County individually support, by resolution, the final constitutional amendment package presented to the Legislature. Time: 30 minutes B. INFORMATION ITEMS: 1. ELECTRIC INDUSTRY DE -REGULATION: AN INFORMATIONAL BRIEFING ON PTI NS FACIN9 LWAL GOVERNMENTS. [Cathy Novak; Mayor of Morro Bay, will give information presentation] [Allen Settle, Mayor of San Luis Obispo, will present request of aggregating possibilities] Recommendation: City Managers explore all options and report back findings to all Cities and County within four months. Time: 30 minutes ADJOURNMENT: �3 December 19, 1997 MEMORANDUM TO: Mayor and Council Members FROM: Sherry Stendahl� SUBJECT: January 8`h Joint Councils Meeting I spoke with Atascadero City Clerk Marsha Torgerson about whether the Board of Supervisors will officially attend the joint meeting in Atascadero. At this point we won't know if the Board will participate until their January 61" meeting (if they adjourn to January 8'h). If they do not participate, Marsha will have on hand at the joint meeting a copy of our two resolutions (agenda items 1 and 2) listing only the seven cities. Marsha will call the County Clerk of the Board to ask her to mention the joint meeting to the Supervisors at their January 6`h meeting. Marsha asked me to let you know that after listening to the Board of Supervisors on the radio last week, Mayor Pro Tem Ray Johnson of Atascadero wrote a strong letter to Ruth Brackett. c: Bonnie Gawf John Dunn' November 25, 1997 MEMORANDUM TO: Council Colleagues FROM: Allen K. Settle SUBJECT: Results of Mayors' Meeting 11/25/97 The Mayors met on Tuesday, 11/25/97 and by unanimous decision, voted to invite the SLO County Board of Supervisors, along with the seven city councils to have a joint meeting on Thursday, January 8, 1998 at the Lake Pavillion in Atascadero (social hour 6:00 - 7:00 p.m., meeting at 7:00 p.m.). There will be four items on the agenda, three of which will be action items and one information item. They are as follows: 1) A joint resolution to urge the state to return the property tax monies previously taken away from the cities, and authorize restored property taxes to be used for needs such as public safety and public works—road construction and maintenance. This item will be presented by Mayor Reed (Grover Beach) and Allen Settle (SLO). 2) A resolution to freeze existing and future property tax taken away from cities. This will be presented by Mayor Cathy Novak (Morro Bay). 3) Resolution to urge the federal government and state to streamline the permit process for obtaining permits to protect waterways from future flood damage. I will present this resolution based on our most recent experience with the Army Corps of Engineers. 4) Information item which will ask the administrative officers of the respective government entities to look at the best option for ways to approach electric rate deregulation. This will become a future action item the next time the cities meet as more will be known about the impacts of electric utility deregulation. It is my intention to have copies of these resolutions for all Council Members as early as possible. Our next mayors' meeting will take place in SLO on Thursday, December 11th at 11:30 in the Hearing Room. With respect to the joint meeting with the Supervisors and all cities on January 8th, the goal is to show we have a unified front to demonstrate to state and federal governments our concerns. Further, the timing of this meeting will allow legislators to propose a bill for the next legislative session to meet the deadline requirements for submission of new A JOINT RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCILS OF SAN LUIS OBISPO COUNTY AND THE COUNTY BOARD OF SUPERVISORS URGING THE STATE STATE LEGISLATURE AND THE GOVERNOR TO APPROVE RESTORING PROPERTY TAXES PREVIOUSLY TAKEN AWAY FROM THE CITIES AND COUNTIES AND AUTHORIZING RESTORED PROPERTY TAXES TO BE USED FOR LOCAL GOVERNMENT NEEDS SUCH AS PUBLIC SAFETY AND PUBLIC WORKS WHEREAS, the State of California, in order to deal with their own budgetary shortfalls, took property tax revenue away from general purpose local government units (counties and cities) in fiscal years 1992 through 1994, and WHEREAS, since that time most units of local government have had a more difficult time delivering services to their citizens, including public safety and in building and rehabilitating needed public facilities because of this loss of revenue, and WHEREAS, most local government jurisdictions have had a very difficult time constructing and maintaining their street and road systems due to insufficient funding for this purpose, and WHEREAS, most units of local government have had to use available general funds for critically needed public services such as police and fire, which has resulted in the neglect of maintaining our public facilities and infrastructure and, in doing so, has contributed to a deteriorated condition of our streets and roads, and WHEREAS, units of California local government will continue to see the further deterioration of their facilities and infrastructure and, particularly, streets and roads, unless additional funds are made available for this purpose. NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED by the City Councils of the cities of San Luis Obispo County and the County Board of Supervisors that we urge the Governor and the Legislature of the State of California to move forthrightly and expeditiously to restore property taxes previously taken from the cities and counties to meet local needs such as public safety and public works construction and maintenance, and. BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED that the City Councils and the Board of Supervisors of San Luis Obispo County believe this matter is of great urgency for the units of local government and is of the highest public interest both to people residing within cities and counties and, therefore, to the citizens of the State of California. _Jo i wT GITAE& REST/Nq F1 LE November 7, 1997 MEMORANDUM TO: Council Colleagues FROM: Allen Settle I` SUBJECT: Mayors' Joint Meeting with Ruth Brackett The Mayors' met with Supervisor Ruth Brackett Friday, November 7, 1997 to discuss three agenda items for a joint meeting of all seven cities and the Board of Supervisors. The three items include: 1) Legislation to Sacramento and the Governor's Office to begin paying back, in increments, ERAF funds that are due city and county governments for the specific purpose of maintenance and repair; 2) To seek legislation to stop further taking of sales tax revenues by the State; 3) To request the Federal Government to coordinate the permit process to allow cities and counties to correct flood damage on our waterways within our jurisdiction. A tentative date of January 8, 1998, a Thursday, is scheduled for this meeting to take action on the three above-mentioned items. A fourth item for information may be a report on how cities and counties will be impacted by the electrical deregulation to take effect in January, 1998. It is my hope that CSAC (County Supervisors Association of California) and the League of California Cities will join us, along with our elected representatives, to begin a state- wide effort to join forces and demand that Governor Pete Wilson begin to return, in an incremental fashion, ERAF money for the purpose of road repair and maintenance. The location of the meeting will be in South County or in San Luis Obispo and I will keep you informed as to the location and the wording of these three action items so that all of you can comment and make any changes you feel might be appropriate. /ss c: John Dunn Ken Hampian JeffJorgensen of Mol~.. ' Bay r MORRO BAY, CALIFORNIA 93442 -772 -6200 -N " ,•�.•�h'ra'S�II�,.hr�✓}� M1 7- •4. .N 1- �.v ^tip Fr• .�• �. - �,.-.-,-�:• _..Ntr.. r���..".......�,..,�.. i.""�- �'r N^.r«-. v..-...�..._.n September 26, 1:97 Dennis Hennessy, District Manager Pacific Gas & Electric P.O. Box 8592 San Luis Obispo, CA 93406-8592 Dear Mr. Hennessy' The seven incorporated Cities of Sari Luis Obispo County are fully aware that PG&E nlus-t meet the resiructuring regulations ordered by the Public Utilities Commission. Although the restructuring may have positive benefits to consumers, the proposed reductions will have an unintentional reduction in property tax revenues to local government. We are aware that PG&E has entered negotiations with the County of San Luis Obispo and San Luis Coastal Unified School District for a possible one time settlement. It appears once again that the Cities have been left out of the process and will ultimately suffer the most from any revenue reductions. More than half of the County's population reside in the incorporated areas. Failure to include representation from these areas only results in near-sighted settlements that truly don't encompass and address the needs of all the citizens of our County. The seven incorporated Cities of San Luis Obispo County respectfully request that PG&E support the inclusion of a representative from the Cities A any future meeting on this topic. 3 a J__O� City City City of PgSo Robles,, �r r City of San Luis Obispo NANCE arbor Street ADMINISTRATION 595 Harbor Street City of Arroyo Grandee j City f Grover Beach �� „2 = R�:.._ r:..�5 City of Pismo Bt6ach. OCT FIRE DEPARTMENT 71 5 Harbor Street DEPARTMENT PLANNING AND BUILDING POLICE DEPARTMENT rnbarcadero 535 Harbor Street 850 Morro Bay Blvd. SLQ C' CCi.1NCil.. PUBLIC WORKS 695 Harbor Street RECREAI-ION AND PARKS 1 001 Kennedy Way