Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAbout5.1 Formation of County Svcs for Bridges CITY OF DUBLIN AGENDA STATEMENT CITY COUNCIL MEETING DATE: October 24, 1988 SUBJECT Written Communication Regarding Formation of County Service Area for Bridges EXHIBITS ATTACHED Letter from Harry Hecht, Acting County Public Works Director dated September 26, 1988 and attachments; Resolution and Exhibit. RECOMMENDATION 0/ Adopt Resolution. FINANCIAL STATEMENT: No cost to the City. ._T DESCRIPTIQN :.___.The-___County__of_ Alameda_pres_en_tiv _._maintains,__three .. __. estuary bridges that lay within the incorporated limits of the Cities of Oakland and Alameda, but serve the entire County. Historically, the County' s Road Fund has borne the entire cost of maintaining and operating these bridges. The County has projected that the County's Road Fund will not have sufficient funds to operate and maintain these bridges in the future. In 1987, all of the Cities in the County entered into a Gas Tax Sharing Agreement in which the Cities pledged to assist the County in seeking means to mitigate the cost of operating and maintaining these bridges . The County- has indicated that these bridges could be maintained utilizing Special District Augmentation Funds when there is a shortfall in the Road Fund, if the County was able to form County Service Area. The Special District Augmentation Funds are monies that were created by the State Legislature with Assembly Bill 8 . In order to create a County Service Area to access these funds, the Cities in the County must agree to join the County Service Area. As proposed, the County could not assess a City for services provided by the County Service Area for Bridges unless each individual City gave its consent. The County is not proposing an assessment to maintain these bridges . They are only proposing a County Service Area to access the Special District Augmentation Funds. Given that the Cities and the County have agreed to work together to assist the County with this problem, and there are no cost implications for the City of Dublin, it is Staff' s recommendation that the Council adopt the attached resolution consenting to the City of Dublin' s inclusion in the Alameda County Service Area for Bridges . COPIES TO: �t ITEM NO. .� '? :,# t, r 1 r SIr . t t i t s r. *. r F t . �` '� 717 1 — ^5, -.. .. -- At ..S b 'S 1' + yQ COUNTY OF ALAMEDA PUBLIC WORKS AGENCY LAG k+ 399 Elmhurst Street • Hayward, CA"94544-7395 Y a�-q (9;1, .. (415)670-5480 September 26, 1988 Alameda County Mayors' Conference 835 East 14th Street San Leandro, California 94577 _ Attention: Mr. Bill Haden Executive Secretary Dear City Mayor: SUBJECT: Formation of a County Service Area for Bridges At the meeting of the Alameda County City Managers held on September 21, 1988, the city managers approved in concept the formation of a Countywide County Service Area (CSA) for Bridges, which will provide a secure source of funding for the maintenance and operation of three estuary bridges. It is, therefore, requested that your City Council adopt a Resolution of Consent for inclusion in the CSA for Bridges. 'I apologize that this request is made on very short notice, but time is of the essence. In order to qualify for Special District Augmentation Fund (SDAF) revenues this.fiscal year (1988- 89) , the CSA should be formed no later than December 31, 1988. Because of legal requirements regarding Local Agency Formation Commission and Board of Supervisors public hearings, your City Council must act favorably on the Resolution of Consent no later than October 21, 1988. BACKGRWND: The. County maintains three estuary bridges as a result of agreements with the Army Corps of Engineers. Currently, the County's Road Fund bears the entire annual $1.4 million cost of maintaining and operating these bridges. Efforts by the County to transfer responsibility for the bridges to federal and state agencies have not been successful. It will be difficult for the Road Fund to continue to maintain the necessary levels of funding for the operation and . maintenance of these bridges in the future as existing Road Fund sources are expected to decrease annually by as much as $3.3 million. Government Code Section 25210.4a specifically authorizes CSAs to provide those miscellaneous extended services, relevant to bridge construction, impr ovement and maintenance. The formation of the CSA would alleviate the impact of these revenue losses by enabling the County to use Special District Augmentation Funds (SDAF) for. bridge maintenance and operation. Preliminary discussions with the County — Administrator's Office indicate that projected SDAF growth is expected to be sufficient to fund the maintenance and operation of the b_ ridges for the near future. Please refer Attachment A,: "SDAF AND FUNDING FOR ESTDARY BRIDGES", prepared by the County Administrator's Office, and to Attachment B, a copy of 'h 2! 4 C' }' i d ]Z 3 C R-1 r r r' 4 1 a K 1 s� � ri^ } a k r r 1> > i�A Ec fi Mayors' Conference 2 - • t September 26, 1988 a memorandum from County Counsel to the County Administrator's Office regarding "Bridge Maintenance" and use of SDAF monies. Also, an election is not required to form :a CSA nor,to-receive SDAF revenues. A number of studies by various agencies, including traffic studies, -indicate that these bridges are used by residents throughout the County. The Mayors' . Conference has determined that although these bridges lie entirely within the incorporated limits of the cities of Oakland and Alameda, they serve the entire County. The Mayors' Formula Agreement states that the cities agree to assist the County in seeking means to mitigate the cost of operating and maintaining the bridges. In order to provide this assistance, all Alameda County cities are being asked to pass a Resolution of Consent, requesting inclusion in the proposed CSA. ' A draft Resolution of Consent-is attached for your consideration. Upon receipt of the cities' Resolutions of Consent, the County may then develop the plans, environmental documents and LAFCO application required to begin the CSA formation process, which will include public hearings and notices in compliance with County Service Area Law (Government Code Section 25210.1 et seq) . On June 28, 1988, the Alameda County Board of Supervisors approved in principle the formation of the County Service Area for Bridges. The Local Agency Formation Commission (LAFCO) and the Board of Supervisors require that the benefit area of a bridge maintenance CSA include the incorporated and unincorporated areas of the County before the CSA can be established. Therefore, we are requesting your participation in this project. FINANCING: It is anticipated that the growth of the SDAF will be sufficient to fund the maintenance and operation of. these bridges at their current level for the foreseeable future. If SDAF revenues should prove insufficient to support the full cost of the bridges at some point in the future, negotiations with the cities to levy special assessment fees would be reopened. Road Fund monies will be used to stTplement the SDAF funds as needed, aril efforts will continue to obtain any available State or Federal bridge program funds. Sincerely, DIRECTOR CF PUBLIC WORKS HH:csa Attachments - „ w ATTACHMENT A: err +'a 'av- z, r a7,'- ? ° :4, F 3,:^” �""'� '�� j �s .F M • C ^ • _ SD JL AND FUNDING FOR ESTUARY = In 1978 as a response to the,revenue shortfalls created l Proposition 13, the State distributed a one-time block grant among all special districts. Each district received a proportional share of this 'bailout': based on their share of the loss suffered by all special_districts statewide.''`'The following year. AB 8 created a Special District'Augmentation Fund (SDAF) -=in each County to provide a long term source of augmenting those budgets. Each county's SDAF pool was created by first transferring property taxes fram' school districts to ,the affected special districts (according to the amount of the bailout) and then immediately shifting that additional property tax revenue to the SDAF. The school districts were'then subvented by the State from 'a different source for the amount of loss. AB 8 did not simply shift property tax revenue to special districts. It went_°: further .by creating a pool and giving each county's Board of Supervisors discretion to make the yearly allocation to each district. This allows - flexibility to meet changing needs and priorities. Also, although the original distribution served as a gross measure of statewide 'special district needs', it was not equitable as long term, district level, solution. Districts with capital projects underway in 1978 received relatively more than their normal operating budget while other districts with unusual one-time revenues received little or even none. In general,` the SDAF pool has graven each year by the amount of growth of the property taxes shifted to the county's special districts. However, since 1984 the growth has come from dependent districts only. In 1984 Revenue and Taxation Code Section 98.6 was modified to create a distinction between districts controlled by the Board of Supervisors (dependent districts)- and those with their own governing board (independent districts) . The effect of this change was to freeze independent district contributions to, and allocations from the SDAF at 1983-4 levels. Now only Alameda County's " , dependent districts continue to contribute to, and benefit from the subsequent growth of the fund. The Alameda County Board of Supervisors has already set aside sufficient SDAF funds to operate and maintain the estuary bridges for FY 1988-89. Current projections indicate available funding at that level for at least the next several years. However, according to both County Counsel and LAFCO, these funds cannot be appropriated until a CSA is created that includes the area of benefit. Therefore these funds cannot be used for bridge maintenance and operation without city approval to join the CSA. Source: County Administrator's Office September 12, 1988 ATTACHMENT B COUNTY COUNSEL 0 DATE: September 8, 1988 TO: Robert Sakai, County Administrator's Office, QIC 20102 FROM: -Ben Zuppan, Deputy County Counsel, QIC 20104 Z SUBJECT: Bridge Maintenance Special District Augmentation Funds are available for the use of special districts. (Revenue and Taxation Code section 98.6) . The term "special district" includes a county service area. (Revenue and Taxation Code section 2215) . Bridge maintenance is an authorized "miscellaneous extended service" for a county service area. (Government Code section 25210.4a(15)) . Hence, the County may allocate these funds to a county service area for bridge maintenance purposes. BZ/pb 8412J • • SEP 21988 If ; CSA FORMATION OUTLINE Page 1 CSA B-1988-1, BRIDGES . BEGIN DATE ACTIVITY SUMMARY WHO NOTE: The following dates use MINIMUM time frames, with no allowance for delays. August 29 Meet with City Manager's Committee Harry Hecht, B. Sakai Hal, Cronkite, Lee Horner & Bill Norton September 14 Submit Board Package for October 4 meeting CSA' Administration with copy to LAFCO (Resolution of Application, LAFCO Application and Report, WITHOUT Resolutions . of Consent) September 21 City Managers Meeting Cities September 22 Submit Final Letter to Cities from Chairman, Board of Chairman, Board of Supervisors after meeting with city representatives . Supervisors October 4 Board Approves Resolution of Application • Board of (without knowing which Cities are in CSA) Supervisors • October 7 Mail Notice of Hearing for LAFCO Public Hearing LAFCO (25 days notice- required per B. Kern, LAFCO) Staff Report to LAFCO from Registrar of Voters, LAFCO Assessor's Office and Planning Department; Staff Report filed October 12 Mayors Meeting October 21 Submit Board Package for November 8 meeting CSA Administration (Resolution of Intent; Set Public Hearing, include Resolution to Establish CSA) October 24 City Councils have adopted Resolution of Consent; Cities Public Works Agency (670-5549) has City Resolutions so that final LAFCO application form, metes and bounds description, boundary map and environmental statement can be prepared for submission to LAFCO. . October 25 Public Works Agency advises LAFCO verbally CSA Administration who is in/out of proposed CSA October 28 LAFCO Report Written for November 3 meeting LAFCO jr'�x.34 yiL Y 3' s v ; a st 1 � � • r . CSA FORMATION 0UILINE r r. Page -2 CSA >.B-1988-1, BRIDGES' ' BEGIN DATE ACTIVITY SUMMARY MHO ' November 3 ** LAFCO must have either Consent Resolution- ** ? ? . 4 PM or verbal confirmation that City Council has approved/disapproved inclusion, final _ metes and bounds description, final boundary • map and final environmental statement. November 3 Special LAFCO Meeting; Public Hearing, LAFCO November 7 LAFCO completes Notice of Determination and LAFCO Resolution approving CSA Formation November 7 City Resolutions of Consent must be received ' CSA Administration by and filed with Clerk of the Board before . Board approves Resolution of Intention per CSA Law. November 8 Board of Supervisors approves Resolution of Board of Intention and Sets Public Hearing Supervisors (CSA Law requires minimum of 30 days notice; Cities' Resolution of Consent already filed with the Clerk of the Board.) - November 14 Deliver Notice to Inter City Express Clerk of the Board (CSA Law: 30 - 60 days) . Inter-City Express. December 20 Public Hearing; Board approves Board of Resolution to Establish CSA Supervisors (decision within 30 days) NOTE: Board meeting of 12/27/88 was cancelled; the . 12/20 meeting is last scheduled meeting of 1988. _ • December 21 Request to Auditor to Establish separate CSA Administration CSA. Fund ? ? File with State Board of Equalization LAFCO ' - Request to Auditor to Establish separate CSA Administration CSA Fund RESOLUTION NO. - 88 A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF DUBLIN ************************** A RESOLUTION CONSENTING TO INCLUSION IN THE ALAMEDA COUNTY, COUNTY SERVICE AREA FOR BRIDGES WHEREAS, in an agreement negotiated by the Mayors Conference between Alameda County and the Cities of Alameda County, the cities agreed ". . .to assist the County in seeking means to mitigate the cost of operating and maintaining the Oakland/Alameda estuary crossings, the cost of which are currently borne entirely by the County. . ."; and WHEREAS, the City Council has determined, in accordance with the Plan for the Formation of a County Service Area for Bridges attached hereto as Exhibit A, that a County Service Area for Bridges, for the maintenance and operation of the High Street, Park Street and the Miller-Sweeney Bridges, would benefit all of Alameda County; and WHEREAS, the City Council has further determined that although the Alameda County Board of Supervisors may levy special assessments on properties within a County Service Area, the Board will not institute such charges within the incorporated areas of Alameda County without the affected City or Cities prior review and consent; and WHEREAS, County Service Area Law states that a city may be included in a county service area if a Resolution of Consent, adopted by the majority vote of the membership of the city legislative body, is filed with the Clerk of the Board of. Supervisors: NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED that the City Council of the City of Dublin, by this resolution, hereby consents to and requests inclusion in the Alameda County, County Service Area for Bridges. PASSED, APPROVED AND ADOPTED this 24th day of October, 1988. AYES: NOES: ABSENT: Mayor ATTEST: - City Clerk - . c > .a ! -. i r �t a { k r r Y c . 1 t � -` • j,� A a �--sir /�� .4' iJ r.}..y < hZ . .JNR. y J hE r IBIT A i . �Y ks � ,. r s 3 1r y. c ? ,S• r x � x a� 5 .. �` ? J i "` Sz ' • • PLAN _FOR T FOFd%TION CF A O nfri SERVICE 'AREA-40k BRIDGES r u k BAMBINI/0 - The County maintains three estuary bridges as a result of agreements with the Army Corps of Engineers. ;-Currently,` the County's:Road Fund bears.;the entire annual $1.4 million cost of maintaining and operating these bridges. :Efforts by the County to transfer responsibility for the bridges to federal and state agencies have not been successful. It will be difficult for the Road Fund to continue to maintain the necessary levels of funding for the operation and maintenance of these bridges in the future as existing Road Fund sources are expected to decrease annually by as much as $3.3 million. Government Code Section 25210.4a specifically_authorizes CSAs to-provide those miscellaneous extended services relevant to bridge construction, :_improvement and maintenance. . , - The formation of the CSA would alleviate the impact of these revenue losses by enabling the County to use Special District Augmentation-Funds (SDAF) for bridge maintenance and operation. Preliminary discussions with the County Administrator's Office indicate that projected SW growth `is expected to be sufficient to fund the maintenance and operation of the bridges for the near future. The Local Agency Formation Commission (LAFCO) and the Board of Supervisors require that the benefit area of the proposed CSA include the incorporated and unincorporated areas .of the County before the CSA can be established. Also, an election is not required to form a CSA nor to receive SDAF revenues. A number of studies by various agencies, including traffic studies, indicate , , that these bridges are used by residents throughout the County. The Mayor's Conference has determined that although these bridges lie entirely within the incorporated limits of the cities of Oakland and Alameda, they serve the entire County and state in the Mayors' Formula Agreement that the cities agree" to assist the County in seeking means to mitigate the cost of operating and maintaining the bridges. In order to provide this assistance, all Alameda County cities are being asked to pass a Resolution of Consent, requesting inclusion in the proposed CSA to provide a secure source of funding for the maintenance and operation of these bridges. Upon receipt of the cities' Resolutions of Consent, the County may then begin the CSA formation process,. which will include public hearings and notices in compliance with County Service Area Law (Government Code Section 25210.1 et seq) . On June 28, 1988, the Alameda County Board of Supervisors approved in principle the formation of the County Service Area for Bridges. At the meeting of the. Alameda County City Managers held on September 21, 1988, the city managers approved in concept the formation of a Countywide County Service Area (CSA) for Bridges. FINANCING It is anticipated that the growth of the SaAF will be sufficient to fund the — maintenance and operation of these bridges at their current level for the foreseeable future. If SEP,F:revenues should prove insufficient,;to support the . full cost of the bridges at some point in the future, negotiations with .the cities to levy special assessment fees would be reopened.- Road Fund monies will be used.to supplement the SDAF funds as needed, and efforts will''continue to obtain any available State or Federal bridge program funds.