Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAbout5.2 Participate County/Tri-Valley Cities Task Force CITY OF DUBLIN AGENDA STATEMENT CITY COUNCIL MEETING DATE: April 27, 1992 SUBJECT: Written Communication from the City of Newark Requesting the City of Dublin' s Participation in the Formation of a Southern Alameda County/Tri-Valley Cities Task Force (Report Prepared by: Lou Ann Riera-Texeira, Assistant to the City Manager) EXHIBITS: Letter dated April 9, 1992, from David W. Smith, " Mayor, City of Newark RECOMNENDATIO - Review request. Consider appointing a City Council representative to the Task Force. , FINANCIAL Costs unknown at this time. STATEMENT: . DESCRIPTION: The City of Newark has expressed concern about the treatment and lack of representation that Southern Alameda County and the Tri-Valley cities have experienced recently. Consequently, the City of Dublin, along with the other Southern Alameda County and Tri-Valley Cities has been asked to participate in a special Task Force. . The Task Force would be charged with determining ways to better influence Alameda County. If the City Council is interested in pursuing this concept, Council should appoint a City Council representative to the Task Force. 2 COPIES TO: ITEM NO. ♦ CITY CLERK FILE I hi /to ma RECEAVED APR 16 1992 CITY OF IXJ63LIN CITY OF NEWARK, CALIFORNIA 37101 Newark Boulevard • Newark, California 94560-3796 (415)793-1400 FAX(415)745-9972 April 9, 1992 The Honorable Mayor and City Council City of Dublin 100 Civic Plaza - Dublin, California 94568 Dear Mayor and Councilmembers: The City of Newark is increasingly concerned about the treatment and lack of representation that Southern Alameda County and the Tri-Valley cities have experienced recently. We have explored a number of options of how to turn this problem around, and clearly, all of the options can only come about if there is a consensus among the cities involved. For this reason, we are asking you to determine if you are interested in this pursuit and in appointing a City Council representative to a task force whose goal or purpose should be to determine ways we can better influence Alameda County. If your City is interested in pursuing this,we ask that you contact Councilwoman Shirley Sisk who will be Newark's representative in this endeavor. Sincerely, DAVID W. SMITH - Mayor - DWS:mr Attachment - • 1991 - THE ARGUS 1.L.L1J 1 ild vLr r r +-+-•-J-++ ,,.s• 4c.y`, A=1 6 Monday,laavember 11, - --._ - • :., E".44. 7F . •_y. X12 .ti, 7} -tis vtP.s, '-9 / e-1- a kit tf� I �' ,�' ..-.r �...r- _� tc .. FE,!¢ _v.... 1'.'`.-`. 1 <- 7.'-X_'vil._.L''se r s . • OAKLAND RECEIVES A LOT MORE in county Services than those services in 1990-91.This chart compares . ..• Oakland gets more it pays for in county taxes.With 29 percent of the Oakland with every other Alameda County city on the L population,the city contributes about 19 percent of all basis of how much each pays in county taxes(not ' •. 'than It a s for the county taxes which pay for health,public including state'and federal tax contributions),and how' P J protection and welfare. It received 50-78 percent of much each city gets back in county services. • y cart° J 'y"i••s^"T% yz `� .sr�• vv. .."- e'xv s.'' a is 2 1 ,4.- r :+..,•.ce'' e0i-F`�., a ,,A,f= a -�, •l I T rc� } �E r � �'�0' f - , •�'' "- c-• � .s v..,_F'=-1, �y+yDr+.``4` ,,-2 a••�.,A->a�_.- �.s;_.._`�. z x�... 1-- Wi ®®® Residents of most Alameda County cities in 1990-1991 paid taxes to the county in about J*.R`i�`•T�•J:LS ti 0n "Inn^. r the same proportion as'their'city's population.Oakland,however as the chart shows), i ' ,o..,,.�e..,..,.. is the only city to pay'much less,proportionately,than its population size.Per capita,• T UNI : D S Ea ® .Oakland adults paid less in taxes than residents of any other city. • • 9^I t>: • 11k w %OF COUNTY WHAT EACH ADULT %OF COUNTY 7.r CITY TAXES EACH PAID ON AVERAGE POPULATION i kI i- 3 C CITY PAID IN COUNTY TAXES EACH CITY HAS • ';� =' Dubin 2Y $282 2Y d• At . t- k [ e . . ..._. 3Y©.- TII I - -. C tltaPYD+ ' 4-•+ Union CrtY 4%. 5289 .4').t.,.., county services in � - C. - a _ r _) Wver_moae L�,.7_�6Y .. ..�..... 0_5220 t 6� r" imp booking m• d sveuon -. 4 - �, - l ® O I 1V )5R'.L $326 �6eaie ah d°le r ra, �� "`-- s -. 'Pleasanton "7Y - 5537 + "t% .,,,,,,,,,,.,,,m;;,.... # Q�,i i 10 _ _•��.�i�i-il I-„ San Leandro 7 368 5Y ` i•^ Namede[coon• d9 --�•-^�r���-I•-�)Berkeley-t.�.j�'SY Hv+.t•.+"�"a 3+_:5254'i.,.r+?.: ••sic; Auaimr�Canuauer s ' `.�" ! .L------------t!....._,_-�._ _,-___ -• Hayward _ 99' _19Y naieiN.:ore:[pvnty 5284 I i __ •..� - -TsQthers.,'r,.S."x_.;7 % t-.V_?::53671';-=.,..r _ 129' Office,sue1,rdler'i I Yr � Fremont 18% .5384 13% Nero ive Office, • Planning Depanent 1990 Census -_---'--- - .----- ---•- Oakland .- 19% �.. 5166 .29% 0ata. rn I • • n 6 €I I ' l � `h'' ?t h t-w,,,- t .?>:2 --",,- -.,..-':-..?-4 -;1-:;-.1%.. ..-:.:a7 kW z 91 w I �C L` P."'' .y - t J ._ r� - IN 1990.91,DUBUCPA02ECtION `�' "' 1/2 of all 3/4 of a OAKLAND GENERATED 75%of �q[ - { cost net of county county taxes. w ^ � 1 _ llina[ien[slpa[iemswho _. cost counryconty �•- -r arrests County spontatleast onen'ghtlat y`} y the county's n+o hasp tats. 2�°' GENFAALASSISTANCE(GA)15 the 5mg!a 5179.3million,it was the y� Were patients and 61%of the registered ., biggest welfare program paid for pnmanly ngl 29,,,,n,P,37m p a made in Tents at the coup five toe bythe's depatmentd are from � patients county's F§t 'withcolin tax dollars.Oakland residents•�. .2'2o.9" ...-.." Oakland. x clinics daring fiscal 1991. 1 �. the sne.kite department Oakland .-received"78%(about 528 million)of the 536 perior and municipal courts, " ....,- i Many suburban cities pay the distrttaaerney end the '" ra'+�. p poNonately mice million spent on the program in 1990 public defender.It excludes much or more in county t Here is how all the sties in Alameda 97 individual police departments. • r`ti „xes and fees compared r County compared 8:. i � the poi cots thcY 9°n t - +-s• i ti(tT- Thecounryruns m.o rT,,,i ls- t "T %of GA- /each dry '? �+ ` 1' `� "� xgd nit noauand one Eairmon in sert s ...'i:?, Leandro-at a cost 0040.167,713 in 1990-91 ^% City " sty received paid m taxes F Y'" De!ow are the estimated number and percent mrinpauen[sat - Alameda 1 8% 5/ 7 • the[wohesphals bY�o k �suburbs oakIand ' I I .oat 3�I £ - Berkeley 7.4% 8%. Wn-' a; City Dfromn total each x Dublin 0.1% 2� �. - s ''� . I• each city Dana city paid Fremont r;2.0% 18/ - j '... ti•Alameda 378 2% 5% W t' { ' a. ..„. f t, V '�j'+" I • Berkeley 666 4% 8% r Hayward 61% 9/ t g•;'• I Dublin 1 2% 8% 6 Livermore 03/ 5% ,•;�r ^� \� • �J ' Fremont 311 2% 18% "' YF} 3,lv,s a - - i Hayward 1,215 8% 9% Newark 04/ 3/ Au ests in Felony arrests in • Livermore 134 1% s% 1'i.1,��- Oakland,+-- 'Lu.781%' 11• 199' a' '� ". a All arrests Felonyarsts in a Newark 118 1% 3% �"'# M, Pleasanton 0 19' 7/ - E4 N31+ - ri Oakland 11,913 75% 19% x, - .L„ > • a 'Y eN•- Pleasanton 60 0% 7% { San"Leandro,:i17! T 39' `' "i7/ '" ..,. R,, Cost )suburban .... ,,, 1 I ,4. „y",,,,, ,Y0. arrese for average / San Leandro 466 3% 7% k ^ 's Union Ctty 0 99'0 4/ rgi ' adult Oakland 1L:',J�L411 U nCity 210 2% 3% f .'":�- s - i I t-4 _s 4fi'n ;� resident �°h' = Others 210 2% 13% rx _Otber ktiH r15:/' 13/o- Sop r 3cx.F r 4 " �.,.-4.-,-W-- ., ssecr '�`` - Cost at Oakland - '4 11 i f,�®� The county sr ecr�ru 0 neat)Oakland, 4a_. ?y i i3--c,.4� � 'D cz arrests for average I n,n aiameaa.xaw.aea anaN L - � '•i� __ 9e �. � � �I I 1 This n n D e the estimated number and percent f -'>' aaultsuburban ,4, egis[ered 0aS ny ciryentl Ne percent of counry tax a +' r may" A-, 3-- resident •� it I t.i en9ge a hc'Mconmb:.de:he e.ng srefrun grit- �, Y t 'L ,...rte �.x'v"-•�}'+.' amiss.Me net county cast in 199091 was 93 939291. _ Ir 1oN , ^M 1,:t - N ri } foi rote taxes Y.of : .. p o • & : �, � patients I PEOPLE FROM OAKLAND used 58% ftreatments provided by the county's 54 . 4.1-., '''c;',.c ", City each each mental health facilities,which cost the county 515,531,246 in 1990-91.The , °e n °°°P x, I each tiny Dedenrs. sip,paid chart shows how much people in each city used the facilities in terms of i C• �e,'� �p1-18 s °e °' Alameda 1,110 4% 5% number of treatments'compared to how much each city paid in county taxes. m' 1° 'v ill ;Berkeley 584 2% 8"'e ,.I for nai,n.Irom each city. .y,!�as Alameda 4,679 % SYo 1 Dublin 8 0% 2% Ciry fof aaae,re tis %of rote)ea.snoms eecnf taxesie Berkeley 8,495 % 8%Fremont 2,238 8% 78% ` I Alameda 776 3% 5q t. `Fremiont 8,082 8% 78% Hayward 4,256 14% 9% Berkeley 1,320 5% 8% I Livermore 43 0% 5^'e ::-',:i:1 y "- --Hayward•. 9,508 9%- 9% ., '1 Newark 1,186 4% 3% Dublin/Pleasanton 7,512 4% 18 Livermore .2,652 3% She ?I 1 Oakland 17,954 61% 19% i' • Fremont 973 8% 1B% Newark ..2,978 3% 3% yy'I Pleasanton 50 0% 7"e s Hayward 2,116 8% 9% Oakland„ 49,900 50% - 19% QI San Leandro 574 2% 7% 0 Newark 525 2% 5% Pleasanton 3,329 3% 7% tii Union City 870 3% 4% fy. Oaklank 77B 1% 3% a San Leandro 2,942 3% 7% N Oakland 14,779 58% 19% iii, I Others 472 2% 13% San Leandro _ 1,700 7% 7% Union City 2,022 2% 4% fit i 73% Note: numberlersthan i%isli:.(1. n• 't% Union City 415 2% 4% Others 4554 5% H Others 663 3% 13% - -' _ __ _ "- _ = AVAILABLE HEALTH CARE,low cost housing and homeless shelters are some of the• l',!'s,.,c': ' '�0. .ki reasons why Oakland has most of the county's poor,sick,disabled,homeless, ■ != 1.3,- - i's. = A -, L� unemployed and others in need.Suburban residents in a sense are paying to keep _.... -.. __ .._ .._. _ r'•`,,,, ; problems in Oakland-and Out of their own backyards. • ati EA H GAEL f 4=Y 7- l-) Eith)._ --1 ESS g >H,oL S U N1Pr GY What Oakland offers: --'1 What Oakland offers: a- az, What Oakland offers: Z People are quite literally dumping 1 Oakland houses 53%of the county's --Nee Oakland offers the lowest-cost I I-f on Oakland.People from lhe suburbs • �, ty L_I secretive leave their garbage and _ .r homeless population-many of housing in Alameda County. . �r'=".- worthless castoffs on Oakland streets. Two of the county's five health clinics I ,a1 t whom come from outside the city. ''`� Here are the affordable housing The ciryspends5370,000 peryearto and 10 of 18 community-based clinics �... %. ! This chart compares county- Ta figures for Alameda County tides. cleanu the problem and has F supported homeless shelters. -` Median P P that receive some county funds. _Ji pP units Units hem. Meai.e launched apmgram to crack down: I~- � �y I fol bed' nu a bed 19homeach Ciry needed built S bulk diva cent of 145 people caught dumping during My er4rs nights hero each Alameda 1,359 318 23.4% 5267,600 5632 arecen[four-dayperiod,about half ••• .••• 54 county-supported • provided provided city Berkeley 757 441 58.3% 5261,000 5392 came from Alameda,Berkeley, Alameda 2,300 2.0% 2.0% Dublin 665 0 0.0?', 5260,900 5817 Cnsmo Valley,Danville,Hayward, mental health facilities. Berkeley 26,549 20.5% 8.0% Fremont 3,751 702 18.7% 5264,300 5732 Fremont San Leanda and Union 21 of the 26 AIDS Fremont 4,329 3.4% 7.0% Hayward 2,269 635 20.0% 5184,500 5629 City.Police have identified 22 treatment centers that Hayward 16,060 12.4% 16.0% Oakland 3,426 2,495 72.8% 5177,400 5486 -locations where dumping is prevalent ••• •• • - -' ' are at least partly ••of•the county's substance Livermore 5,791 4.5% 2.0% Pleasanton 7,496 575 38.4% 5297200 0760 e• N funded with county Anis; Reszarch i -.abuse oroorams. •. .•- - .d„ih.c ..... .Oakland 68,625 53.0% 38.0% -.. .-_ '-...., - -�,.r-. .... __. _-,. ._ _. __- .. Jpi`.L•msdia. Ses:n%1 O+cr.