The URL can be used to link to this page

Home My WebLink About4.01 TriVlyTranspDevFee . . . ... '. .. lJi CITY CLERK File # D[@~(2]-~[Q] AGENDA STATEMENT CITY COUNCil MEETING DATE: June 29, 1998 SUBJECT: Tri-Valley Transportation Development Fee JPA Report by: Lee Thompson, Public Works Director EXHIBITS ATTACHED: 1. Letter from Supervisor Donna Gerber, dated June 24, 1998 and suggested pledge 2. Draft Resolution Pledging to Continue the Collection of TV1D Fee Pursuant to the TVTD JEPA RECOMMENDA nON: ~pt Resolution Pledging to Continue the Collection of TVTD Fee Pursuant to the TV1D JEPA FINANCIAL STATEMENT: None DESCRIPTION: On May 5, 1998, the Council adopted a resolution approving the "Joint Exercise of Powers Agreement Pertaining to Tri- Valley Transportation Development Fees for Traffic :Mitigation" (JEP A). On June 2, 1998, the Council adopted a resolution approving several changes to the JEP A, including language which would allow any party a one-time option to opt out ofthe 1EP A during a 30-day period. The "opt out" language was requested by the City of Livermore. Since that date, Contra Costa County's representative to the Tri-Valley Transportation Council (Chair of the TVTC expressing concerns with the recent changes made to the JEP A In particular, Supervisor Gerber expressed concern that more than one party could opt out of the 1EPA and not collect the fee. (Exhibit 1.) Supervisor Gerber's letter requests that the other parties to the JEP A adopt a resolution pledging not to exercise the option to opt out of the 1EP A If six of the jurisdictions adopt such a resolution, including Contra Costa County, the County will consider the 1EP A in its current form (with the "opt out" language). A draft resolution (Exhibit 2) is attached for the Council's approval. The resolution was prepared by the City Attorney based on the sample resolution provided by Contra Costa County. The City Attorney has made only slight modifications to the resolution prepared by Contra Costa County. It is the City Attorney's opinion that the legal effect ofthis resolution will be to state the Council's current intention; it -will not bind this Council or any future Council from withdrawing from the JEP A and tenninating the fee_ It is, in effect, a political, not a legal statement. Staff recommends that the Council adopt the draft resolution (Exhibit 2), EHS:Jj. J :\WPD\MNRSW\114\OI \AGENDA \1 998\T\"ID1P A629 ----------- COPIES TO: ITEM NO. ~ .. (, . .' . 309 Diablo Road oanvUle. CaRfomia 94526 (510) 820-8683 F/JJ( (510) B2O-6627 Contra Costa Cowrty Board of Supervi$Ors DoNNA GERBER DISTRICTI,..-eM8OA June 24, 1998 Ms. Sharre1l Michelotti. TVTC Chair P.O.Box 520 Pleasanton. CA 94566 Dear Ms. Michelotti: On May 27. 1998. the Tri Valley Transportation Committee adopted amendments to the proposed Join! Exercise of Powers Agreement (JEP A). allowing panies to "opt out" of the Agreement once the 1-5801I-680 Interchange project is funded. These amendments changed the nature of the entire Agreement: what was once an instrument for regional planning and mitigation for development throughout the region could become just a one-project funding source. with an option to continue once that project is funded. While we are still committed to regional planning and cooperation, the proposed "opt out" language is a source of significant concern for Contra Costa County. The Nexus Study. upon which this JEP A is founded, is based on eleven proposed projects and on all seven jurisdictions participating. If the parties to this JEP A withdraw from the Agreement after the first project is funded. then the Nexus Study will no longer be applicable, leaving the parties vulnerable to a legal challenge to the fee. Since Contra Costa County initially would be a "donor" to this program. we are particularly vulnerable to any legal challenge. According to our County Counsel. if only one party opts out of the Agreement, the nexus would not be significantly affected. and the study would still have some validity should it be challenged. Therefore. Contra Costa County would be willing to enter into this JEPA with the "opt out" language as proposed. provided there is some assurance that no more than one party will withdraw. Since five jurisdictions approved the JEP A without the 4<opt out" language, we can assume that the option of withdrawing from the fee program was not particularly impOItaDt to them. If each of these jurisdictions adopts a separate pledge to continue their participation in the TVTD Fee program after the first project is funded, then Contra Costa County can agree to the JEP A in its current form. A sample pledge is enclosed with this letter. If six panies, including Contra Costa County, adopt such a pledge, we will accept the current terms of the JEP A. There is still time to pass an ordinance in time to begin collecting fees by the target date of September 1, 1998. Without these pledges, the County cannot enter into the JEPA without changes to the text. This may cause significant delays in implementing the fee. Contra Costa County remains committed to regional planning for the Tri- Valley area. The County had been ready to enter into the TVTD JEPA before the "opt out" language was adopted and is still willing to enter into the JEPA, provided that some compromise is reached between the panies to allay the County's concerns. We hope that each jurisdiction will find this compromise acceptable and that we may go forward in the spirit of cooperation. anachment: Pledge to Continue the Collection Of the TVTD Fee Exhibit 1 II PLEDGE TO COl\"TINUE THE COLLECTION OF TVTD FEE PURSUM7 TO THE TVTD JEP A , RECITALS 1. Tri-VaIley Transportation Development Fee: The Cities of Dublin, Livermore, Pleasanton, and San Ramon, the Town of DanviUe, and the Counties of Contra Costa and Alameda (collectively referred to as "the Parties") are in the process of adopting a Joint Exercise of Powers Agreement (JEP A) to implement a fee on future development for the mitigation of regional traffic impacts. . 2. Regional Projects: The Cities and Counties have identified, through the Tri-Valley Transportation Plan/Action Plan for Routes of Regional Significance, eleven regional Transportation hnprovement Projects, listed in Section 8 of the JEPA These projects are designed to help mitigate the regional impacts of forecast development within the Tri- Valley Development Area The proposed fee is based on the estimated cost of these projects and the estimated future development expected in the Tri-Valley area. A more detailed basis for1he fee is outlined in 1he Nexus Study, cited in 1he JEP A. 3. 1-58011-680 Interchange Project:. The Parties have identified the 1-580fl-680 Interchange project as its fIrst priority, and have agreed to give this project first priority. Only when the Parties' share of this project is fimded wiIJ the Parties begin to fimd other projects from the list 4. "Opt-out" Language: At the May 27, 1998 meeting of the Tri- Valley Transportation Council, the COlmcil agreed to add a second paragraph to Section 18 of the JEP A. ~ting each party a limited opporttmity to withdraw from the JEP A, with such withdrawal not becoming effective until the I-580fl-680 Interchange project is fully funded. . 5. Effect of Withdrawal: The Parties recognize that the withdrawal of more than one party from the JEP A potentially could affect the Nexus Study and the fee being adopted by the Parties. However, if only one party withdraws, this is not expected to have any significant effect on either the Nexus Study or the collection of the fee by the remaining Parties. NOW, THEREFORE, does hereby pledge to remain a party to the JEPA and continue collecting fees pursuant to the JEP A until all of the Projects listed in Section 8 have been fully constructed and/or acquired, the second paragraph of Section 18 of the JEP A notwithstanding. Further, the TVID Fee shall remain in effect until the Transportation Improvement Projects are fully constructed and/or acquired. This pledge shall take effect as soon as six such pledges are adopted by the Councils or Boards of the respective parties and it shall remain in efect and be binding until such time as the JEP A terminates pursuant to the first paragraph of Section ] 8 of the JEP A. Mayor or Board Chair . ATTEST: City Clerk or Clerk of the Board of Supervisors .. . RESOLUTION NO. - 98 . A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY OF DUBLIN ************** PLEDGING TO CONTINUE THE COLLECTION OF TVTD FEE PURSUANT TO THE TVTD JEPA Recitals 1. . Tri- Valley Transportation Development Fee. The Cities of Dublin, Livermore, Pleasanton, . and San Ramon, the Town ofDanville and tP-e Counties of Contra Costa and Alameda (collectively referred to as "the Parties") are in the process of adopting a Joint Exercise of Powers Agreement (JEP A) to implement a fee on future development for the mitigation of regional traffic impacts. 2. Regional Proiects. The Parties have identified, through the Tri- Valley Transportation Plan! Action Plan for Routes of Regional Significance, eleven regional Transportation Improvement Projects, listed in Section 8 of the proposed JEP A. These projects are designed to help mitigate the regional impacts offorecast development within the Tri-Valley area. A more detained basis for the fee is outlined in the Nexus Study, cited in the JEP A. 3. I-5801I-680 Interchange Proiect. The Parties have identified the I-5801I-680 Interchange project as the first priority for use of the fee revenues, and have agreed to give this project first priority. Only when the Parties' share of this project is funded will the Parties begin to fund other projects listed in Section 8 of the proposed JEPA . 4. "Opt-out" Language. At the May 27, 1998 meeting of the Tri-Valley Transportation Council, the Council agreed to add a second paragraph to Section 18 of the 1EPA, enabling any party to withdraw from the JEP A once the first project, the I-5801I-680 Interchange project, is funded. The City Council approved such language at its June 2, 1998 meeting. NOW, TIIEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED that the City of Dublin does hereby pledge to remain a party to the JEP A and continue collecting fees pursuant to the JEP A until the Projects listed in Section 8 of the JEP A have been fully constructed and! or acquired, second paragraph of Section 18 of the 1EP A notwithstanding. Further, it is the Council's intention that the TVTD Fee shall remain in effect until the Transportation Improvement Projects are fully constructed and/or acquired. PASSED, APPROVED AND ADOPTED this 29th day of June, 1998. AYES: NOES: .A.B SENT: ABSTAIN: Mayor . ATTEST: City Clerk K::/G;6- 29- 98/resotvtd. doc EHS:rja J:\WPD'J\1NRS\V\114\O J \RESOL\TVTDFJPA616 Exhibit 2