HomeMy WebLinkAboutMINUTES - 02122013 - C.24RECOMMENDATION(S):
ACCEPT the adopted 2013 State Legislative Platform, as amended by the Board of Supervisors at their January 22,
2013 meeting.
FISCAL IMPACT:
No fiscal impact to Contra Costa County from this action.
BACKGROUND:
At their January 22, 2013 meeting, the Board of Supervisors reviewed the Proposed 2013 State Legislative Platform.
The Board adopted the Platform with an amendment to policy #43 which addresses locally-approved special taxes.
This item is a transmittal of the Adopted 2013 State Legislative Platform (see attached), as amended by the Board of
Supervisors.
The Proposed policy #43 was:
"SUPPORT a reduction in the 2/3 vote requirement for special taxes that fund a comprehensive community plan
developed by the county, cities and school districts that improves health, education and economic outcomes and
reduces crime and poverty."
The
APPROVE OTHER
RECOMMENDATION OF CNTY ADMINISTRATOR RECOMMENDATION OF BOARD COMMITTEE
Action of Board On: 02/12/2013 APPROVED AS RECOMMENDED OTHER
Clerks Notes:
VOTE OF SUPERVISORS
AYE:John Gioia, District I Supervisor
Candace Andersen, District II
Supervisor
Mary N. Piepho, District III
Supervisor
Karen Mitchoff, District IV
Supervisor
Federal D. Glover, District V
Supervisor
Contact: L. DeLaney,
925-335-1097
I hereby certify that this is a true and correct copy of an action taken and entered on the minutes of the Board
of Supervisors on the date shown.
ATTESTED: February 12, 2013
David Twa, County Administrator and Clerk of the Board of Supervisors
By: Carrie Del Bonta, Deputy
cc:
C. 24
To:Board of Supervisors
From:David Twa, County Administrator
Date:February 12, 2013
Contra
Costa
County
Subject:2013 State Legislative Platform, as amended by the Board of Supervisors
BACKGROUND: (CONT'D)
Adopted policy #43 is:
"SUPPORT a reduction in the 2/3rd vote requirement for locally-approved special taxes that fund health,
education, economic, stormwater and/or public safety programs and services."
Although the Board of Supervisors supported the inclusion of "stormwater" in the amended policy position, they
indicated that Contra Costa County would not sponsor legislation related to this effort and expressed a preference
for such a change to be "bundled" with other policy-matters regarding the 2/3rd vote threshold for special taxes.
CONSEQUENCE OF NEGATIVE ACTION:
CHILDREN'S IMPACT STATEMENT:
ATTACHMENTS
Adopted 2013 State Legislative Platform
ADOPTED 2013 STATE
LEGISLATIVE PLATFORM
Contra Costa County
As amended
January 22, 2013
Contra Costa County 1
Table of Contents
LEGISLATIVE/REGULATORY ADVOCACY PRIORITIES ............................................................................. 2
STATE PLATFORM POLICY POSITIONS ................................................................................................. 5
Agricultural Issues ..................................................................................................................................... 5
Animal Services Issues .............................................................................................................................. 6
Child Support Services Issues .................................................................................................................... 7
Climate Change Issues............................................................................................................................... 8
Elections Issues ......................................................................................................................................... 8
Emergency Preparedness, Emergency Response ..................................................................................... 9
Eminent Domain Issues ............................................................................................................................. 9
Flood Control and Clean Water Issues ...................................................................................................... 9
General Revenues/Finance Issues .......................................................................................................... 10
Health Care Issues ................................................................................................................................... 13
Human Services Issues ............................................................................................................................ 16
Indian Gaming Issues .............................................................................................................................. 18
Land Use/Community Development Issues ............................................................................................ 19
Law and Justice System Issues ................................................................................................................ 21
Levee Issues, Sacramento-San Joaquin Delta Issues ............................................................................... 22
Library Issues ........................................................................................................................................... 25
Telecommunications Issues .................................................................................................................... 25
Transportation Issues .............................................................................................................................. 25
Waste Management................................................................................................................................ 28
Adopted 2013 Platform 2
2013 STATE LEGISLATIVE PLATFORM
CONTRA COSTA COUNTY
Each year, the Board of Supervisors adopts a State Legislative Platform that
establishes priorities and policy positions with regard to potential State legislation and
regulation. The State Legislative Platform includes County-sponsored bill proposals (as
needed), legislative or regulatory advocacy priorities for the year, and policies that
provide direction and guidance for identification of bills which would affect the services,
programs or finances of Contra Costa County.
LEGISLATIVE/REGULATORY ADVOCACY PRIORITIES
Each year, issues emerge through the legislative process that are of importance to the
County and require advocacy efforts. For 2013, it is anticipated that critical issues
requiring legislative advocacy will include the following:
1. State Budget – The state’s continuing economic recovery, prior budget cuts, and the
additional, temporary taxes provided by Proposition 30 have combined to bring the
State Budget to a much improved financial condition. The Legislative Analyst’s Office is
now indicating that the state has reached a point where its underlying expenditures and
revenues are “roughly in balance.” Specifically, the Governor proposes $138.6 billion in
General Fund and special fund spending in 2013-14, up 4.5 percent from 2012-13. The
Administration forecasts that the state’s General Fund budgetary balance will be $1
billion at the end of 2013-14 under the Governor’s plan. However, this optimistic
prognosis is dependent on growth in the economy and the stock market, and the budget
faces considerable risks from federal fiscal policy and revenue volatility . Any of these
factors could derail the plan for out-year operating surpluses.
The long-standing practice of state government has been to look to counties as a
means of balancing its budget. While opportunities to do so are more limited with the
passage of Proposition 1A, the state has been creative in its efforts to include counties
as part of its budget balancing solution and may do so again through additional program
realignment and/or revenue reductions.
Of particular concern to counties is the inadequate reimbursement for our ever-
increasing cost of operating several human services programs: the “Human Services
Funding Deficit,” formerly referred to as the “Cost of Doing Business.” The annual
shortfall between actual county expenses and state reimbursement has grown to over
$1 billion since 2001, creating a de facto cost shift to counties. The funding gap forces
counties to reduce services to vulnerable populations and/or divert scarce county
resources from other critical local services. It also increases the risk of state and
federal penalties.
Contra Costa County 3
2. Health Care – Counties play a critical role in California’s health reform efforts.
Counties serve as employers, payers, and providers of care to vulnerable populations.
Consequently, counties stand ready to actively participate in discussions of how to best
reform the health care system in California and implement the national health care
reform legislation passed in 2010, The Patient Protection and Affordable Care Act
(ACA).
The optional Medi-Cal Expansion, to take effect on Jan. 1, 2014, is likely to be part of
the State Budget process, while a Special Session on Health Care Reform – expected
to be called by the Governor sometime this month – will address Health Care Exchange
issues and the required Medi-Cal expansion. (The mandatory expansion includes
changes to eligibility and enrollment for populations currentl y eligible for Medicaid and is
estimated to cost the state General Fund $350 million.) The ACA required states to
expand Medicaid programs to allow childless adults at or below 138 percent of poverty
to be eligible for Medicaid (known as Medi-Cal in California). The Supreme Court struck
down that mandate but allowed it to be an option for states , which California has
exercised. The Governor’s Budget provides two options for that optional expansion: a
“state option” and a “county option.” Both options, whi ch will need to be vetted by the
Legislature, will have fiscal implications for counties. The implementation of the ACA
through the health benefits exchange (“Covered California”) and with a proposed “Medi-
Cal Bridge” program (a basic health program that would bridge between Medi-Cal and
the Exchange) dovetail with the Medi-Cal expansion. The outcome of these issues will
have a major impact on Contra Costa’s health care delivery system.
In the coming year, the County will continue to work on the implementation of required
health care reform measures to maximize federal revenue. The County will support
efforts to provide counties with the necessary tools to implement health care reform
which may include performing eligibility and enrollment, preserving exis ting county
resources from 1991 Realignment, providing for a smooth transition in 2014 for the
various operational systems, and supporting legislation to ensure that low -income
families are covered under the Affordable Care Act. In addition, the County will
continue to work to reduce uncompensated health care costs.
3. Water and Levees /The Sacramento-San Joaquin Delta – The enactment of the
Delta Reform Act (2009), a package of bills that established the co-equal goals for
reliable water supply and ecosystem restoration for the Delta as well as the proposed
Bay Delta Conservation Plan (BDCP)--an effort to construct a pair of massive tunnels
under the Delta--will bring significant, large-scale change to the Delta as we know it.
The scope and content of these changes, as well as enduring political battles between
north and south over water, will continue to guide legislative and administrative agendas
in the coming year.
Significant future impacts upon the County in the areas of water quality and supply,
levees, ecosystem, governance and flood control are anticipated. Additionally, a water
bond has been delayed from the November 2012 ballot. Consideration should be given
to the potential for the County to sponsor Delta-related legislation through our legislative
Adopted 2013 Platform 4
delegation. The County may also work with the Delta Counties Coalition (DCC) to
sponsor Delta-related legislation.
Particular areas of concern for 2013 include, but are not limited to, the ongoing
development of the tunnel project, the impacts of Delta plans on local land use
authority, efforts to expedite state bond funding for levee improvement projects, and the
development of flow standards that will impact water quality and ecosystem health. The
County’s adopted Delta Water Platform, as well as the Strategic and Action Plans, are
incorporated in this Platform by reference.
4. Realignment Implementation – The battle for constitutional protections for 2011
Realignment concluded successfully on November 6, 2012 when Proposition 30 was
passed by the voters. Proposition 30 provides constitutional guarantees to the funding
that supports Realignment and safeguards against future program expansion without
accompanying funding. With these provisions in place, Contra Costa County can
continue to implement the array of programs transferred under 2011 Realignment,
confident that funding is secure and programmatic responsibilities are defined.
Any future proposals to realign programs to counties must have constitutionally
guaranteed ongoing funding and protections. The County will oppose any proposals
that will transfer additional program responsibility to counties without funding and
protections. The County will also oppose efforts that limit county flexibility in
implementing programs and services realigned in 2011 or infringe upon our ability to
innovate locally.
The County resolves to remain accountable to our local constituents in delivering high -
quality programs that efficiently and effectively respond to local needs. Further, we
support counties’ development of appropriate measures of local outcomes and
dissemination of best practices.
With regard to Public Safety realignment, the County will support efforts that facilitate
the smooth transition of prisoners and parolees at the county level. Counties have
received parolees whose latest crime fits the specified “non-violent, non-serious, non-
sex offender” (N3) definition but who have a criminal background that includes violent,
serious and/or sexual crimes. Under the current legislation, the pe rson’s latest
offense/crime determines if they meet the N3 criteria. However, counties have received
people who have a very violent background. Specifically, a change would be requested
to prevent those whose total criminal background does not meet the N3 criteria. These
individuals should stay under the responsibility of the state.
The County will also support efforts to provide additional funding/grants to those
counties that have a commitment to lowering the crime rate and reducing recidivism
through the provision of innovative, comprehensive, evidence-based programs for
offender populations and their families. The County will also continue to support efforts
to ensure that the receipt of Local Community Corrections Funds matches the amounts
anticipated from the state, without undue delay.
Contra Costa County 5
STATE PLATFORM POLICY POSITIONS
A brief background statement accompanies policy positions that are not self -evident.
Explanatory notes are included either as the preface to an issue area or following a specific
policy position. Please note that new and revised policy positions are highlighted and in italics.
The rationale for the policy position is italicized.
Agricultural Issues
1. SUPPORT efforts to ensure sufficient State funding for pest and disease control
and eradication efforts to protect both agriculture and the native environment,
including glassy-winged sharpshooter, light brown apple moth, and Japanese
dodder activities; high risk pest exclusion activities; pesticide regulatory and law
enforcement activities; and noxious weed pest management. Agriculture is an
important industry in Contra Costa County. Protection of this industry from pests
and diseases is important for its continued viability.
2. SUPPORT continued appropriations for regulation and research on sudden oak
death, a fungal disease affecting many species of trees and shrubs in native oak
woodlands. The County’s natural environment is being threatened by this
disease.
3. SUPPORT funding for agricultural land conservation programs and agricultura l
enterprise programs to protect and enhance the viability of local agriculture. The
growth in East County and elsewhere has put significant pressure on agricultural
lands, yet agriculture is important not only for its production of fresh fruits,
vegetables and livestock, but also as a source of open space.
4. SUPPORT legislation to establish legal authority where needed to facilitate the
efforts by the California Department of Food and Agriculture and the Department
of Boating and Waterways to survey and treat all incipient infestations of the
South American spongeplant and a continued long-term effort to rid the Delta of
this and other invasive species. Invasive aquatic species are a threat to
agriculture, the environment and recreation in the Delta . This includes support
for efforts by the Department of Boating and Waterways to secure multi -year
permits for eradication of multiple species of invasive weeds in the Delta.
5. SUPPORT the CSAC policy statement regarding revisions to the California
Conservation Act of 1965 (the Williamson Act) to support legislative changes that
preserve the integrity of the Williamson Act, eliminate abuses resulting in
unjustified and premature conversions of contracted land for development, and to
fully restore Williamson Act subventions. The state subventions to counties also
must be revised to recognize all local tax losses.
Adopted 2013 Platform 6
Animal Services Issues
6. SUPPORT efforts to protect local revenue sources designated for use by the
Animal Services Department; i.e., animal licensing, fines and fees. Fines, fees,
and licensing are major sources of revenue for the Animal Services Department.
The demand for animal services is increasing each year as does the demand on
the General Fund. It is important to protect these revenue sources to continue to
provide quality animal service and to meet local needs.
7. SUPPORT efforts to protect or increase local control and flexibility over the
scope and level of animal services. Local control over the scope of animal
services is necessary to efficiently address public safety and other community
concerns. Local control affords jurisdictions the ability to tailor animal service
programs to fit their communities. Animal related issues in dense urban areas
vary from those in small, affluent communities.
8. SUPPORT efforts to protect against unfunded mandates in animal services or
mandates that are not accompanied by specific revenue sources which
completely offset the costs of the new mandates, both when adopted and in
future years. Unfunded mandates drain our limited fiscal resources and, at the
same time, chip away at local control over the scope and level of services.
9. SUPPORT efforts to ensure full funding of State animal services mandates,
including defense of the Department of Finance’s lawsuit against the State
Commission on Mandates regarding the State obligations for reimbursement of
local costs for animal services incurred in compliance with SB 1785. The County
invested large sums of money to comply with SB 1785, with the assurance that
our cost would be offset by reimbursements from the State. Failure by the State
to honor the reimbursements negatively impacts the County General Fund and
Animal Services’ budget.
10. SUPPORT efforts to protect and/or increase County flexibility to provide animal
services consistent with local needs and priorities. The demand for quality
animal service programming continues to increase each year. The County is
experiencing population growth and changing demographics. It is incumbent
upon the Animal Services Department to be flexible enough to adjust to the
changing needs and priorities.
11. SUPPORT efforts to preserve the integrity of existing County policy relating to
Animal Services (e.g., the Animal Control Ordinance and land use requirements).
Contra Costa is looked upon as one of the model Animal Services Departments
in the state. Its policies, procedures, and ordinances are the yardstick against
which other Animal Control organizations are measured. The local control
exercised by the Board of Supervisors is key to that hallmark.
Contra Costa County 7
Child Support Services Issues
12. SUPPORT the establishment of a statewide electronic registry for the creation
and release/satisfaction of liens placed on property of a non -custodial parent as
necessary to collect delinquent child support payments. California law currently
provides that recording an abstract or notice of support judgment with a County
Recorder creates a lien on real property. This requires recording the judgment in
each of the 58 counties in order not to miss a property transaction. An electronic
registry would simplify not only the creation of liens but also the
release/satisfaction of liens because there would be a single statewide point of
contact, and the entire process would be handled electron ically through
automated means.
13. SUPPORT amendment of current law that states that documents completed and
recorded by a local child support agency may be recorded without
acknowledgement (notarization) to clarify that the exception is for documents
completed or recorded by a local child support agency. This amendment clarifies
that documents that are prepared by the local child support agency and then sent
for recording either by the local child support agency or by the obligor (non-
custodial parent) or by a title insurance company are covered by the exemption,
a technical point not acknowledged by all county recorder offices.
14. SUPPORT efforts to simplify the court process for modifying child support orders
by the court by requiring court appearances only when one of the part ies objects
to the modification. Currently, establishment of parentage and support by the
court is permitted without court appearance if both parties are in agreement. A
similar process for modification would reduce court time, the workload of all
involved agencies and parties, and streamline the process.
15. SUPPORT efforts to ensure that the reduction caused by the federal Deficit
Reduction Act of 2005 to the California Department of Child Support Services is
not passed down as a reduction to the local pro gram. The Act places a
restriction on the ability of states to use incentive funds as the state match to
draw additional federal funds. In previous years, California used its $30 million in
federal funds in child support programs.
16. SUPPORT efforts that would require the Department of Child Support Services to
provide any notice form, information, or document that is required or authorized
to be given, distributed, or provided to an individual, a customer, or a member of
the public to be given, distributed, or provided in a digitized form, and by any
means the Department determines is feasible, including, but not limited to, e-mail
or by means of a web site.
Adopted 2013 Platform 8
Climate Change Issues
17. SUPPORT the CSAC Climate Change Policy Statements and Principles which
address a broad range of issues affected by climate change, including water, air
quality, agriculture, forestry, land use, solid waste, energy and health. The
document is largely based on existing CSAC policy and adapted to climate
change. Additionally, the document contains a set of general principles which
establish local government as a vital partner in the climate change issue and
maintain that counties should be an active participant in the discussions in the
development of greenhouse gas reduction strategies underway at the state and
regional level.
18. SUPPORT efforts to ensure that the implementation of AB 32 results in harmony
among the greenhouse gas reduction target created by the Air Resources Board
for each regional/local agency, the housing needs numbers provided by the state
Department of Housing and Community Development pursuant to housing
element law, the Sustainable Communities Strategy, and the Regional
Transportation Plan processes.
19. SUPPORT legislative or administrative efforts that favor allocation of funding
from the California Greenhouse Gas Cap and Trade Program to jurisdictions that
are the largest emitters of greenhouse gas.
Elections Issues
20. SUPPORT legislation to adjust precinct sizing from 1,000 voters per precin ct to
1,250 voters per precinct. With the option of being able to have up to 1,250
voters per precinct, the best polling locations in a neighborhood can be selected,
and that same site is more likely to be used for several elections, thus avoiding
the need to change poll sites for voters.
21. SUPPORT full state reimbursement for state mandates imposed upon local
registrars by the Secretary of State, including special state elections. The state
has committed to reimburse Counties for the cost of certain state mandates.
That reimbursement process, SB 90, can be lengthy and contentious. The SB 90
process is also subject to uncertainties including partial payments, delayed
payments, and now, suspended or no payments. In lieu of the SB 90 process for
Elections, there is merit in the examination of having the state pay its pro-rata
share of costs when state candidates/measures are on the ballot.
22. SUPPORT legislation that would add provisions to the state Elections Code that
would allow special elections to fill a vacancy in a congres sional or legislative
district to be conducted by all mailed ballots at the county’s discretion .
Contra Costa County 9
Emergency Preparedness, Emergency Response
23. SUPPORT legislation that would give local agencies more authority to train
volunteers and help clean-up oil spills without taking on additional legal liability.
24. SUPPORT legislation that would require the state’s Oil Spill Prevention and
Response Agency to improve communication and clean -up technology, increase
safety standards for ships and establish special prote ctions for ecologically
sensitive areas.
25. SUPPORT legislation that would require responses to future oil spills in a shorter
timeframe, with a more regional approach.
26. SUPPORT measures that enable counties and other local agencies to better
exercise their responsibilities to plan for and respond to emergencies and
disasters without taking on additional legal liability and oppose those that do not
recognize or support the county and local agency role in the State’s Standardized
Emergency Management System.
27. SUPPORT legislation or other measures requiring the creation or utilization of
emergency rock stockpiles suitable for levee repair throughout the Delta,
enabling increasingly efficient and less costly prevention of levee breaks and
enhancement of initial response capabilities.
28. SUPPORT legislation or other measures that will enable the Department of
Water Resources to easily and quickly enter into contracts with local entities that
need assistance in planning for emergency response.
Eminent Domain Issues
29. SUPPORT legislation that maintains the distinction in the California Constitution
between Section 19, Article I, which establishes the law for eminent domain, and
Section 7, Article XI, which establishes the law for legislative and administrative
action to protect the public health, safety, and welfare.
30. SUPPORT legislation that would provide a comprehensive and exclusive basis in
the California Constitution to compensate property owners when property is
taken or damaged by state or local governments, wit hout affecting legislative and
administrative actions taken to protect the public health, safety, and welfare.
Flood Control and Clean Water Issues
31. SUPPORT authorization for regional approaches to comply with aquatic pesticide
permit issues under the purview of the State Water Resources Control Board.
Contra Costa County entered into an agreement with a neighboring county and
Adopted 2013 Platform 10
several cities to share the costs of monitoring. While it makes sense for local
government to pool resources to save money, State Board regulations make
regional monitoring infeasible.
32. SUPPORT efforts to provide local agencies with more flexibility and options to
fund stormwater programs. Stormwater permit requirements issued by the
Regional Water Quality Control Boards are becoming more and more expensive,
yet there is no funding. Stormwater services, encompassing both water quality
and drainage/flood control, should be structured like a utility with the ability to set
rates similar to the other two key water services: drinking water and wastewater.
33. SUPPORT efforts to provide immunity to local public agencies for any liability for
their clean-up of contaminations on private lands. This will be more critical as the
Regional Water Quality Control Boards institute Total Maximum Da ily Loads,
which establish a maximum allowable amount of a pollutant (like mercury) in the
stormwater from a watershed.
34. SUPPORT efforts to require the Department of Water Resources (DWR) to
provide 200 year flood plain mapping for all areas in the legal D elta. SB 5
requires the County and cities in the Delta to insure certain development projects
must have 200 year level of protection and to make certain related findings.
DWR has revisited developing zoning flood plain mapping, and if they do, only
working in areas protected by project levees which does not include any areas
within Contra Costa County.
General Revenues/Finance Issues
As a political subdivision of the State, many of Contra Costa County’s services and programs
are the result of state statute and regulation. The State also provides a substantial portion of
the County’s revenues. However, the State has often used its authority to shift costs to counties
and to generally put counties in the difficult position of trying to meet local service needs with
inadequate resources. While Proposition 1A provided some protections for counties, vigilance
is necessary to protect the fiscal integrity of the County.
35. SUPPORT the State's effort to balance its budget through actions that do not
adversely affect County revenues, services or ability to carry out its governmental
responsibilities.
36. OPPOSE any state-imposed redistribution, reduction or use restriction on
general purpose revenue, sales taxes or property taxes unless financially
beneficial to the County. (Note that a redistribution of sales and property tax may
be beneficial to Contra Costa County in the event that sales tax growth lags
behind property tax growth.)
37. OPPOSE efforts to limit local authority over transient occupancy taxes (TOT).
Contra Costa County 11
38. OPPOSE any efforts to increase the County's share-of-cost, maintenance-of-
effort requirements or other financing responsibility for State mandated programs
absent new revenues sufficient to meet current and future program needs.
39. SUPPORT efforts to ensure that Contra Costa County receives its fair share of
State allocations, including mental health funding under Proposition 63 and pass -
through of federal funds for anti-terrorism and homeland security measures. The
State utilizes a variety of methods to allocate funds among counties, at times
detrimental to Contra Costa County.
40. SUPPORT efforts to receive reimbursement for local tax revenues lost pursuant
to sales and property tax exemptions approved by the Legislature and the State
Board of Equalization.
41. SUPPORT continued efforts to reform the state/local relationship in a way that
makes both fiscal and programmatic sense for local government and conforms to
the adopted 2010 CSAC Realignment Principles, with an emphasis on maximum
flexibility for counties to manage the existing and realigned discretionary
programs.
42. SUPPORT efforts to relieve California of the federal Child Support penalties
without shifting the cost of the penalties to the counties.
43. SUPPORT a reduction in the 2/3rd vote requirement for locally-approved special
taxes that fund health, education, economic, stormwater and/or public safety
programs and services.
44. SUPPORT efforts to authorize counties to impose forfeitures for violations of
ordinances, as currently authorized for cities. This would provide the County with
the opportunity to require deposits to assure compliance with specific ordinance
requirements as well as retain the deposit if the ordinance requirements are not
met. Currently, the County is limited to imposing fines which are limited to only
$100 - $200 for the first violation, which has proven to be an ineffective deterrent
in some cases.
45. SUPPORT efforts to redefine the circumstances under which commercial and
industrial property is reassessed to reduce the growing imbalance between the
share of overall property tax paid by residential property owners versus
commercial/industrial owners.
46. SUPPORT efforts to reduce County costs for Workers’ Compensation, including
the ability to control excessive medical utilization and litigation. Workers’
Compensation costs are significant, diverting funds that could be utilized for
County services. Workers’ Compensation should provide a safety net for injured
employees, for a reasonable period of time, and not provide an incentive for
employees to claim more time than medically necessary.
Adopted 2013 Platform 12
47. SUPPORT state actions that maximize Federal and State revenues for county-
run services and programs.
48. SUPPORT legislative compliance with both the intent and language of
Proposition 1A.
49. SUPPORT the provisions of Proposition 22 that would protect County revenues,
particularly as related to transportation revenues and excluding those provisions
related to redevelopment funds.
50. SUPPORT full State funding of all statewide special elections, including reca ll
elections.
51. OPPOSE efforts of the State to avoid state mandate claims through the practice
of repealing the statues, then re-enacting them. In 2005, the State Legislature
repealed sections of the Brown Act that were subject to mandate claims, then re -
enacted the same language pursuant to a voter-approval initiative, and therefore,
not subject to mandate claims.
52. SUPPORT strong Public Utilities Commission (PUC) oversight of state -
franchised providers of cable and telecommunications services, including
rigorous review of financial reports and protection of consumer interest s. AB
2987 (Núñez), Chapter 700, statutes of 2006 transferred regulatory oversight
authority from local government to the PUC.
53. SUPPORT timely, full payments to counties by the State for programs operated
on their behalf or by mandate. The State currently owes counties over $1 billion
in State General Funds for social services program costs dating back to FY
2002-03.
54. SUPPORT full State participation in funding the County’s retiree and retiree
health care unfunded liability. Counties perform most of their services on behalf
of the State and Federal governments. Funding of retiree costs should be the
responsibility of the State, to the same extent that the State is responsible for
operational costs.
55. SUPPORT legislation that provides constitutional protections and guaranteed
funding to counties under Realignment.
Contra Costa County 13
Health Care Issues
The County remains concerned about the implementation of any health care reform measures that could
transfer responsibility to counties, without commensurate financing structures or in a manner not
compatible with the County’s system. The County supports a concept of universal health coverage for all
Californians. Toward that end, the County urges the state to enact a system of health coverage and care
delivery that builds upon the strengths of the current systems in our state, including county -operated
systems serving vulnerable populations.
Currently, California has a complex array of existing coverage and delivery systems that serve many, but
not all, Californians. Moving this array of systems into a universal coverage framework is a complex
undertaking that requires sound analysis, thoughtful and deliberative planning, and a multi -year
implementation process. As California moves forward with health care reform, the County urges the state
to prevent reform efforts from exacerbating problems with existing service and funding. The state must
also consider the differences across California counties and the impacts of reform efforts on the network
of safety-net providers, including county providers. The end result of health reform must provide a
strengthened health care delivery system for all Californians, including those served by the safety net.
56. SUPPORT state action to increase access and affordability. Access to care and
affordability of care are critical components of any health reform plan. Expanding
eligibility for existing programs will not provide access to care in significant areas
of the state. Important improvements to our current programs, including Medi-
Cal, must be made either prior to, or in concert with, a coverage expansion in
order to ensure access. Coverage must be affordable for all Californians to
access care.
57. SUPPORT Medi-Cal reimbursement rate increases to incentivize providers to
participate in the program.
58. SUPPORT administrative streamlining of Medi-Cal, including elimination of the
asset test and semi-annual reporting and changes to income verification.
California should look to other states for ideas to reduce administrative costs,
such as allowing all children born into Medi-Cal to remain on the program until
age 21.
59. SUPPORT actions that address provider shortages (including physicians,
particularly specialists, and nurses). Innovative programs, such as loan
forgiveness programs, should be expanded. In an effort to recruit physicians from
other states, the licensing and reciprocity requirements should be re -examined.
Steps should be taken to reduce the amount of time it takes to obtain a Medi-Cal
provider number (currently six to nine months).
60. SUPPORT efforts that implement comprehensive systems of care, including case
management, for frequent users of emergency care and those with chronic
diseases and/or dual (or multiple) diagnoses. Approaches could be modeled after
current programs in place in safety net systems.
61. SUPPORT efforts that provide sufficient time for detailed data gathering of
current safety funding in the system and the impact of any redirection of funds on
Adopted 2013 Platform 14
remaining county responsibilities. The interconnectedness of county indigent
health funding to public health, correctional health, mental health, alcohol and
drug services and social services must be fully understood and accounted for in
order to protect, and enhance as appropriate, funding for these related services.
62. OPPOSE safety net funding transfers until an analysis of who would remain
uninsured (e.g. medically indigent adults, including citizens, who cannot
document citizenship under current Medicaid eligibility rules) is completed in
order to adequately fund services for these populations.
63. SUPPORT efforts to clearly define and adequately fund remaining county
responsibilities.
64. SUPPORT state action to provide an analysis of current health care
infrastructure (facilities and providers), including current safety net facilities
across the state, to ensure that there are adequate providers and health care
facilities (including recovery facilities), and that they can remain viable after
health reform.
65. SUPPORT efforts to provide adequate financing for reforms to succeed.
66. SUPPORT measures that maximize federal reimbursement from Medicaid and
S-CHIP.
67. SUPPORT state action to complete actuarial studies on the costs of transferring
indigent populations, who currently receive mostly episodic care, to a coverage
model to ensure that there is adequate funding in the model.
68. SUPPORT efforts that ensure that safety net health care facilities remain viable
during the transition period and be supported afterwards based on analyses of
the changing health market and of the remaining safety net population.
69. SUPPORT state action to implement the 2010 Medi-Cal waiver in a manner that
maximizes the drawdown of federal funds for services and facilities, provides
flexibility, and ensures that counties receive their fair share of funding.
70. SUPPORT efforts to increase revenues and to contain mandated costs in the
County's hospital and clinics system.
71. SUPPORT efforts to obtain a fair-share of any state funds in a distribution of
funding for the integration of IHSS and managed care.
72. SUPPORT efforts to increase the availability of health care (including alcohol and
other drugs recovery) to the uninsured in California, whether employed or not.
Contra Costa County 15
73. SUPPORT legislation that improves the quality of health care, whether through
the use of technology, innovative delivery models or combining and better
accessing various streams of revenue, including but not limited to acute and long
term care integration.
74. SUPPORT legislation to protect safety net providers, both public and private.
Legislation should focus on stabilizing Medi -Cal rates and delivery modes and
should advocate that these actions are essential to the success of any effort to
improve access and make health care more affordable.
75. SUPPORT efforts that allow counties to draw down federal Medicaid funds for
providing confidential alcohol and drug screening and brief intervention services
to pregnant women and women of childbearing age who also qualify for Medi -Cal
benefits.
76. SUPPORT state efforts to increase the scope of benefits and reimbursement
rates contained in Minor Consent Medi-Cal to give youth suffering from
substance abuse disorders access to a continuum of care, including residential
and one-on-one outpatient treatment.
77. SUPPORT efforts to give incentives to providers to establish more youth -driven
treatment facilities within the community.
78. SUPPORT efforts to extend Minor Consent Medi-Cal Coverage to incarcerated
youths, many of whom are in custody due to drug related crimes. This could
greatly decrease recidivism in the juvenile justice system.
79. SUPPORT county efforts in the promotion of partnerships that provide integrated
responses to the needs of alcohol and other drugs populations, including criminal
justice, perinatal and youth as well as those populations with co-occurring
disorders.
80. SUPPORT and encourage the development of strategies that include alcohol and
other drugs services in the provision of all culturally appropriate health care
services.
81. SUPPORT efforts to require coverage of medically necessary alcohol and
substance abuse related disorder treatment on the same levels as other medical
conditions in health care service plans and disability insurance policies. Alcohol
and other drugs treatment services are the most under-funded of all health
services. Neither the state nor the federal allocations to the County covers
medical treatment for AOD services, and so are a cost borne by the County.
Adopted 2013 Platform 16
Human Services Issues
82. SUPPORT efforts to increase County flexibility in use of CalWORKs funds and in
program requirements in order to better support the transition of welfare
dependent families from welfare-to-work and self-sufficiency, including, but not
limited to: extending supportive services beyond the current limit; enhancing
supportive services; increasing diversion and early intervention to obviate the
need for aid; developing a state earned income tax credit; expanding job
retention services; developing an eligibility definition to 250% of the poverty level;
and exempting the hard-to-serve from welfare-to-work activities and the 20%
exemption or providing flexibility in the time limit (dependent upon terms and
conditions of TANF reauthorization). SUPPORT efforts to align CalWORKs
property and asset limitations with those of Food Stamps. All of these measures
would make it easier for CalWORKs families to enter employment services,
become employed, and continue with the support they need in order to maintain
their jobs.
83. SUPPORT efforts to revise the definition of “homelessness” in the Welfare &
Institutions Codes to include families who have received eviction notices due to a
verified financial hardship, thus allowing early intervention assistance for
CalWORKs families. Current law prevents CalWORKs from providing homeless
assistance until the CalWORKs family is actually “on the street.” This rule
change would enable the County to work with CalWORKs families who are being
threatened with homelessness to prevent the eviction and, presumably, better
maintain the family members’ employment status.
84. SUPPORT efforts to ensure funding of child care for CalWORKs and former
CalWORKs families at levels sufficient to meet demand. The State of California
has not fully funded the cost of child care for the “working poor.” Additional
funding would allow more CalWORKs and post -CalWORKs families to become
and/or stay employed.
85. SUPPORT efforts to establish an “umbrella code” for the reporting of incidents of
elder abuse to the Department of Justice, thus more accurately reco rding the
incidence of abuse. Current reporting policies within California’s law
enforcement community and social services departments are uncoordinated in
regards to the reporting of adult abuse. Under an “umbrella code,” law
enforcement agencies and social services departments would uniformly report
incidents of elder abuse and California would have much better data for policy
and budget development purposes.
86. SUPPORT efforts that seek to identify and eliminate elder financial abuse and
elder exposure to crime that may be committed through conservatorships,
powers of attorney, notaries and others who have the right to control elder
assets.
Contra Costa County 17
87. SUPPORT efforts to effectively manage the In Home Supportive Services (IHSS)
to establish and maintain cost control mechanisms while delivering quality,
targeted services and maintaining program integrity. Efforts may include, but are
not limited to, establishing an IHSS Volunteer Coordination component coupled
with the rebalancing of available hours. Retired volunteer social workers and
registered nurses could act as local Care Coordinators, enabling IHSS Social
Workers to increase their capacity to perform more timely reassessments that
would enable the management of available hours and target services to those
clients most in need and at risk of institutionalization .
88. SUPPORT efforts to eliminate the finger-imaging requirement for adult food
stamp applicants, recognizing the fraud deterrent aspects of the Electronic
Benefits Transfer System. Elimination of the finger-imaging requirement, which
was originally implemented as a fraud control measure in the old welfare
programs, is viewed by many as an unnecessary or duplicate process. The
current electronic benefits transfer system combined with program eligib ility
processes provides more fraud prevention/detection than does finger-imaging.
89. SUPPORT efforts to allow phone-in Food Stamp Eligibility Redeterminations as a
more cost effective benefit reassessment process. As counties such as Contra
Costa change their business models to utilize centralized service centers, some
of the antiquated process rules and requirements also need to be changed, to
allow cost efficient practices. Changing the rules to allow phone -ins for Eligibility
Redeterminations is one example.
90. SUPPORT efforts to continue expansion of Child Welfare Redesign Program
Improvements including: use of Federal IV-E funding for pre-placement,
prevention activities; development of caretaker recruitment and retention
campaigns; extension of Independent Living Skill services to age 21; and,
funding to implement Children’s Child Welfare Workload Study Results, SB 2030.
Changes in these areas would enable counties to better meet their performance
accountability goals, as required under federal and state statutes.
91. SUPPORT efforts to allow Medi-Cal clients transportation access to medical care
via the most efficient transportation mode possible instead of the very costly
ambulance transportation that is currently prevalent. California is currently
limited to the types of non-emergency medical transportation for reimbursement
by Medi-Cal. However, the federal Medicaid program allows other much less
costly forms of transportation to be used. Other states use this more permissive
definition of approved non-emergency medical transportation to encourage
Medicaid clients to receive preventative care and reduce the incidence of last -
resort ambulance transportation to hospital emergency rooms for primary care.
92. OPPOSE any legislation that increases tobacco taxes but does not contain
language to replace any funds lost to The California Children and Families
Adopted 2013 Platform 18
Act/Trust Fund for local services as currently funded by tobacco taxes,
Proposition 10 in 1998 and Proposition 99 in 1988.
93. OPPOSE legislation, rules, regulations or policies that restrict or affect the
amount of funds available to, or the local autonomy of, First 5 Commissions to
allocate their funds in accordance with local needs.
94. SUPPORT efforts to restore funding in the amount of $80 Million for the Ch ild
Welfare Services Program that was line-item vetoed by Governor
Schwarzenegger in the State’s FY 2009-10 and FY 2010-11 budgets, as these
reductions have a direct impact on local child protective services and the lives of
children.
95. SUPPORT efforts by the Contra Costa County’s executive directors and program
administrators of all Child Care and Development Programs to restore state
budget allocations to the FY 2009-10 levels for the California State Preschool
Program (CSPP), California Center-Based General Child Care Program (CCTR),
CalWORKs Stage 2 (C2AP), CalWORKs Stage 3 (C3AP), Alternate Payment
Program (CAPP), Child Care and Development Grant and the Child Care
Retention Program (AB 212).
Indian Gaming Issues
Contra Costa County is currently home to the Lytton Band of the Pomo Indians’ Casino in San Pablo, a
Class II gaming facility. There is also a proposal for an additional casino in North Richmond. Local
governments have limited authority in determining whether or not such facilities should be sited in their
jurisdiction; the terms and conditions under which the facilities will operate; and what, if
any, mitigation will be paid to offset the cost of increased services and lost revenues. Contra Costa
County has been active in working with CSAC and others to address these issues, as well as the need for
funding for participation in the federal and state review processes and for mitigation for the existing Class
II casino.
96. SUPPORT efforts to ensure that counties who have existing or proposed Class II
Indian gaming facilities receive the Special Distribution Funds.
97. CONSIDER, on a case by case basis, whether or not to SUPPORT or OPPOSE
Indian gaming facilities in Contra Costa County, and only SUPPORT facilities
that are unique in nature and can demonstrate significant community benefits
above and beyond the costs associated with mitigating community impacts.
98. OPPOSE the expansion or approval of Class III gaming machines at the existing
gaming facility in Contra Costa County unless it can be demonstrated that there
would be significant community benefits above and beyond the costs associated
with mitigating community impacts.
99. SUPPORT State authority to tighten up the definition of a Class II machine.
Contra Costa County 19
100. SUPPORT State legislative and administration actio ns consistent with the CSAC
policy documents on development on Indian Lands and Compact negotiations for
Indian gaming.
Land Use/Community Development Issues
101. SUPPORT efforts to promote economic incentives for "smart growth," in Priority
Development Areas including in-fill and transit-oriented development. Balancing
the need for housing and economic growth with the urban limit line requirements
of Measure J (2004) will rely on maximum utilization of “smart growth” and
Sustainable Community Strategy principles.
102. SUPPORT efforts to increase the supply of affordable housing, including, but not
limited to, state issuance of private activity bonds, affordable and low income
housing bond measures, low-income housing tax credits and state infrastructure
financing. This position supports Goals 2, 3 and 4 of the County General Plan
Housing Element.
103. SUPPORT establishment of a CEQA exemption for affordable housing financing.
Current law provides a statutory exemption from CEQA to state agencies for
financing of affordable housing (Section 21080.10(b) of the California Public
Resources Code and Section 15267 of the CEQA Guidelines)—but not to local
agencies. The current exemption for state agencies is only operational if a
CEQA review process has been completed by another agency (e.g., by the land
use permitting agency). Since the act of financing does not change the
environmental setting, the net effect of the exemption is streamlining the process
for providing financial assistance for already approved projects. AB 2518
(Houston) in 2006 was a Contra Costa County-sponsored bill to accomplish this,
but it was not successful in the Legislature.
104. SUPPORT efforts to obtain a CEQA exemption or to utilize CEQA streamlining
provisions for infill development or Priority Development Areas, including in
unincorporated areas. Section 15332 of the CEQA Guidelines is a Categorical
Exemption for infill development projects but only within cities or unincorporated
areas of a certain size surrounded by cities. Without the exemption, housing
projects in the unincorporated areas are subject to a more time -consuming and
costly process in order to comply with the CEQA guidelines than that which is
required of cities, despite having similar housing obligations.
105. SUPPORT efforts to reform State housing element law to promote the actual
production and preservation of affordable housing and to focus less on process
and paper compliance.
106. OPPOSE efforts to limit the County’s ability to exercise local land use authority.
Adopted 2013 Platform 20
107. SUPPORT efforts to reduce the fiscalization of land use decision-making by local
government, which favors retail uses over other job -creating uses and housing.
Reducing incentives for inappropriate land use decisions, particularly those that
negatively affect neighboring jurisdictions, could result in more rational and
harmonious land use.
108. SUPPORT allocations, appropriations, and policies that support and leverage the
benefits of approved Natural Community Conservation Plans (NCCPs), such as
the East Contra Costa County NCCP. Support the granting of approximately $20
million to the East Contra Costa County NCCP from the $90 million allocation for
NCCPs in Proposition 84. Support the position that NCCPs are an effective
strategy for addressing the impacts of climate change and encourage appropriate
recognition of the NCCP tool in implementation of climate change legislation
such as SB 375 and AB 32. Promote effective implementation of NCCPs as a
top priority for the Department of Fish and Wildlife. Support efforts to streamline
implementation of NCCPs including exemptions from unnecessary regulatory
oversight such as the Delta Plan Covered Actions process administered by the
Delta Stewardship Council.
109. SUPPORT legislation that would give local agencies specific tools for economic
development purposes in order to enhance job opportunities, with emphasis on
attracting and retaining businesses, blight removal and promoting smart growth
and affordable housing development, while balancing the impacts on revenues
for health and safety programs.
110. OPPOSE legislation that would create substantial uncertainty over the tax
allocation bonds issued by redevelopment agencies and possible negative credit
impact.
111. SUPPORT legislation that would resolve the administrative funding gap for
agencies serving as the Successor Housing Agency. Such legislation should not
have a negative impact on the localities’ general fund. The Redevelopment
Dissolution Act allows Successor Agencies a modest allowance of tax increment
funds to support Successor Agency administrative costs. There is no such carve
out for Housing Successors. However, unlike Successor Agencies, Housing
Successors have an ongoing obligation to monitor existing affordable housing
developments. These obligations will continue for up to 55 years.
112. SUPPORT legislative and regulatory efforts that streamline compliance with the
California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA) by integrating it with other
environmental protection laws and regulations, modifying the tiering of
environmental reviews, expanding the application of prior environmental reviews,
focusing areas of potential CEQA litigation, and enhancing public disclosure and
accountability.
Contra Costa County 21
113. OPPOSE CEQA reform efforts that reduce environmental protections for projects
that cross county or city boundaries.
114. SUPPORT efforts to improve or streamline CEQA for efficiency without losing
sight of its ultimate goal to thoroughly identify environmental impacts and
mitigations.
115. OPPOSE efforts to change CEQA solely to accommodate one particula r
infrastructure project or set of projects.
116. SUPPORT legislation that amends Section 20133 of the Public Contract Code to
1) delete the existing sunset date of July 1, 2014 for design -build authority
granted to counties, and 2) eliminate the current project cost threshold of $2.5
million required for the use of the design-build method.
Law and Justice System Issues
117. SUPPORT legislation that seeks to curb metal theft by making it easier for law
enforcement agencies to track stolen metals sold to scrap deal ers through such
means as requiring identification from customers selling commonly stolen metals,
banning cash transactions over a certain amount, and requiring scrap dealers to
hold materials they buy for a certain period of time before melting them down or
reselling them.
118. SUPPORT legislation that provides a practical and efficient solution to
addressing the problem of abandoned and trespassing vessels and ground
tackle in an administrative process that allows the California State Lands
Commission to both remove and dispose of such vessels and unpermitted
ground tackle. Boat owners in increasing numbers are abandoning both
recreational and commercial vessels in areas within the Commission’s
jurisdiction. Our state waterways are becoming clogged with hulk s that break up,
leak, sink and add pollutants to our waterways and marine habitat.
119. OPPOSE legislative proposals to realign additional program responsibility to
counties without adequate funding and protections.
120. OPPOSE legislation that would shift the responsibility of parolees from the state
to the counties without adequate notification, documentation and funding.
121. SUPPORT legislation that will help counties implement the 2011 Public Safety
Realignment as long as the proposal would: provide for county f lexibility,
eliminate redundant or unnecessary reporting, and would not transfer more
responsibility without funding.
Adopted 2013 Platform 22
Levee Issues, Sacramento-San Joaquin Delta Issues
The County’s Delta Water Platform was developed in mid-2008 to consolidate and organize the
many County policies and positions into one document that could be utilized to guide actions
and advocacy to promote a healthy Sacramento-San Joaquin Delta.
The Delta Water Platform is comprised of fourteen subject areas. Each of these subject
categories contains relevant policies and background explanatory language. Each subject
category is summarized below; the first five are considered priorities. The policies and
background information can be found in the Delta Water Platform, which is included in this
document by reference
Short Term Actions to be implemented immediately: Includes a broad range of specific,
relatively non-controversial actions to quickly improve the state of the Delta, such as
improvements to levees, the fishery, habitat and emergency response.
Conveyance: Through-Delta and Isolated Conveyance: Consideration of isolated
conveyance must protect and improve the Delta and the entire Bay-Delta ecosystem,
include the broadest range of non-biased scientific analysis of impacts, include levee
repair and all costs of a facility must be paid by beneficiaries.
The Delta Ecosystem: Protection and restoration of an ailing Delta ecosystem has long
been a priority of the Board of Supervisors, including need for additional scientific
research to address fundamental questions, fishery and habitat restoration projects.
Governance: A new or improved system of oversight related to ecosystem and water
management is necessary. The existing Delta Protection Commission land use
governance structure has been successful, requiring no further action. Local
Government representation in any governance structure is paramount.
Levee Restoration: Advocacy for immediate and significant (multi-year) funding and
levee repair is a priority, including upgrades to minimum (PL 84 99) standards for all
levees, and a higher, 200-year level of protection for communities protected by levees.
Stockpiling rock in the Delta specifically for levee repair and continuance of the Long
Term Management Strategy (LTMS) are highly recommended.
Water Quality, Water Quality and Delta Outflow: Protection and improvement of water
quality, quantity and outflow, determination and assurance of adequate water for the
delta ecosystem and examination of the State and Federal project operations (including
potential for reduced exports) are recommended here.
Flood Protection/Floodplain Management: Comprehensive flood management planning
throughout the Delta and its watersheds, as well as funding to bring flood facilities to
200-year levels and revenue generation for flood control districts continue to be of
import.
Contra Costa County 23
Water Rights and Legislative Protections: Existing area-of-origin and other water rights
protections established for the Delta should be preserved.
Regional Self-Sufficiency: All export regions should be implementing all water supply
options available to them to reduce stress on the Delta as a limited resource.
Emergency Response: Collaborative efforts among the Delta counties to improve
emergency response in the region have been productive and are continuing.
Water Conservation: Landscape and household conservation, maximizing use of
reclaimed wastewater, use of meters, and agricultural water conservation are
recommended.
Water Storage: Multi-purpose storage facilities are recommended and groundwater
storage preferred to surface storage options. Detailed groundwater studies are
recommended.
San Luis Drain/Grasslands Bypass: Long-standing opposition to selenium discharges
from this project entering the Delta and support of in-valley treatment solutions are
ongoing. Continued reduction in drainage from the Grasslands Bypass project is also
monitored.
Climate Change: Impacts of climate change must be considered in planning,
engineering and construction activities.
122. ADVOCATE for administrative and legislative action to provide significant funding
for rehabilitation of levees in the western and central Delta. Proposition 1E,
passed in November 2006, provides for over $3 billion for levees, primarily those
in the Central Valley Flood Control Program. Language is included in the bond
for other Delta levees but funding is not specifically directed. The County will
work on a coalition basis to actively advocate for $1 billion in funding through this
bond.
123. SUPPORT legislation that requires the levee repair funds generated by
Proposition 1E be spent within one year. Many public agencies, including
reclamation districts charged with maintaining levees, have complained about the
state’s inaction in allocating and distributing the levee funds that were raised by
the bond sales authorized by Proposition 1E in 2008. Legislation could require
the immediate distribution of these funds to local levee projects. The Delta
Reform Act of 2009 authorized over $202 million for levee repairs. It has been
difficult to obtain explanations from the state as to why these funds are not being
distributed.
124. SUPPORT legislation to amend California Water Code Section 12986, to
maintain the state/local funding ratio of 75/25 for the state’s Delta Levees
Subventions Program, which provides funds for local levee repair and
Adopted 2013 Platform 24
maintenance projects. The code provision s that have the state paying 75% of
project costs will expire on July 1, 2013. At that time the matching ratio will
change to 50/50. This means local reclamation districts will have to pay a larger
portion of project costs (50%, compared to their current 25% requirement). Many
districts do not have the funding to do so. The Delta Levees Subventions
Program should continue to use funds from bonds or other dedicated sources,
rather than the state’s General Fund. For the past several years the program
has been funded from bonds. When these bond funds run out, the program will
have to be funded from the General Fund, unless some other new dedicated
funding source is established. This is something that should be included in the
next Water Bond, if and when there is one.
125. ADVOCATE for legislation dealing with the Delta, including levees and levee
programs, level and type of flood protection, beneficiary-pays programs, flood
insurance, liability and other levee/land use issues.
126. SUPPORT legislation/regulation requiring Reclamation Districts to develop,
publish, and maintain hazard emergency plans for their districts. Emergency
response plans are critical to emergency management, particularly in an area or
situation like the Delta where a levee break could trigger other emergencies. This
legislation/regulation should also include the requirement for plan review and
annual distribution of the plan to the residents of the district, County Office of
Emergency Services and other government agencies that have emergency
response interests within the district.
127. SUPPORT legislation to amend California Water Code Section 85057.5 to bring
the Delta Stewardship Council’s “covered actions” land-use review process into
consistency with CEQA. This section of state code defines a “covered action,”
which refers to local permit decisions that are subject to potential revocation by
the Delta Stewardship Council, as proposed in the Council’s Delta Plan. The
proposed process works as follows: (1) if a local permit application meets the
definition of a “covered action,” the jurisdiction must evaluate it for consistency
with all of the policies in the Stewardship Council’s Delta Plan. (2) If the
jurisdiction finds the project is consistent with the Delta Plan, they notify the
Stewardship Council of this finding. (3) Anyone who objects to the project may
appeal the consistency finding, and it will be up to the Ste wardship Council to
make the final decision. Should the Stewardship Council decide against the local
jurisdiction, there is no appeal process available to the jurisdiction or project
applicant other than legal action.
“Covered actions” are defined in Section 85057.5 of the California Water Code.
It defines them as plans, projects or programs as defined by CEQA, and then
goes on to grant several exemptions to certain types of projects. It does not,
however, provide exemptions for all the project types th at CEQA itself exempts.
CEQA provides a lengthy list of categorical exemptions for plans, projects and
programs that generally do not have significant environmental impacts, and
Contra Costa County 25
projects that have compelling reasons to move forward quickly (such as public
safety projects). The entire list of categorical exemptions from CEQA also should
be exempt from the Delta Stewardship Council’s “covered actions” process .
Library Issues
128. SUPPORT State financial assistance in the operation of public libraries, includ ing
full funding of the Public Library Fund (PLF) and the Direct/Interlibrary Loan
(Transaction Based Reimbursement) program.
129. SUPPORT State bonds for public library construction. The 2000 library
construction bond provided funding for two libraries in Contra Costa County.
There is currently a need of approximately $289,000,000 for public library
construction, expansion and renovation in Contra Costa County.
130. SUPPORT continued funding for the California Library Literacy and English
Acquisition Services Program, which provides matching funds for public library
adult literacy programs that offer free, confidential, one-on-one basic literacy
instruction to English-speaking adults who want to improve their reading, writing,
and spelling skills.
Telecommunications Issues
131. SUPPORT clean-up legislation on AB 2987 that provides for local emergency
notifications similar to provisions in cable franchises for the last 20 years.
Currently our franchises require the cable systems to carry emergency messages
in the event of local emergencies. With the occurrence of several local refinery
incidents, this service is critical for Contra Costa. Under federal law, Emergency
Alert System requirements leave broad discretion to broadcasters to decide
when and what information to broadcast, emergency management offices to
communicate with the public in times of emergencies.
132. SUPPORT preservation of local government ownership and control of the local
public rights-of-way. Currently, local government has authority over the time,
place, and manner in which infrastructure is placed in their rights-of-way. The
California Public Utilities Commission is considering rulemaking that would give
them jurisdiction to decide issues between local government and
telecommunication providers.
Transportation Issues
133. SUPPORT increased flexibility in the use of transportation funds. The County
supports an amendment to the Subdivision Map Act to allow the use of off -site
transportation impact fees to fund pedestrian, bicycle transit and traffic cal ming
facilities necessitated by new development. The Act currently limits the use of
these funds to improvements to bridges and “major thoroughfares.” Senator
Adopted 2013 Platform 26
DeSaulnier introduced such a bill in 2008. The County’s proposal was adopted
by CSAC for its legislative platform in the 2011 session. The proposal would
provide more flexibility in how we can use an existing transportation funding
source.
134. SUPPORT regional coordination that provides for local input in addressing
transportation needs. Coordinated planning and delivery of public transit,
paratransit, and rail services will help ensure the best possible service delivery to
the public. Regional coordination also will be needed to effectively deal with the
traffic impacts of Indian gaming casinos such as those in West County. Regional
coordination also will be essential to complete planning and development of
important regional transportation projects that benefit the state and local road
system such as State Route 239, improvements to Vasco Road, completion of
remaining segments of the Bay Trail, improvements to the Delta DeAnza
Regional Trail, and the proposed California Delta Trail. There may be interest in
seeking enhanced local input requirements for developing the Sustainable
Communities Strategy for the Bay Area mandated by SB 375 for greenhouse gas
reduction. It is important that the regional coordination efforts are based on input
gathered from the local level, to ensure the regional approach does not
negatively impact local communities. “Top-down” regional planning efforts would
be inconsistent with this goal.
135. SUPPORT efforts to improve safety throughout the transportation system. The
County supports new and expanded projects and programs to improve safety for
bicyclists, pedestrians and wheelchair users, as well as projects to improve
safety on high-accident transportation facilities such as Vasco Road. Data on
transportation safety would be improved by including global positioning system
(GPS) location data for every reported accident to assist in safety analysis and
planning. The County also supports school safety improvement programs such
as crossing guards, Safe Routes to Schools (SR2S) grants, efforts to improve the
safety and security of freight transportation system including public and private
maritime ports, airports, rail yards, railroad lines and sidings. The County also
supports limits or elimination of public liability for installing traffic-calming devices
on residential neighborhood streets.
136. SUPPORT funding or incentives f or the use of renewable resources in
transportation construction projects. The County seeks and supports grant
programs, tax credits for manufacturers, state purchasing programs, and other
incentives for local jurisdictions to use environmentally friendly materials such as
the rubberized asphalt (made from recycled tires) that the County has used as
paving material on San Pablo Dam Road and Pacheco Boulevard.
137. SUPPORT streamlining the delivery of transportation safety projects. The length
of time and amount of paperwork should be reduced to bring a transportation
safety project more quickly through the planning, engineering and design,
environmental review, funding application, and construction phases , such as for
Contra Costa County 27
Vasco Road. This could include streamlining the environmental review process
and also streamlining all state permitting requirements that pertain to
transportation projects. Realistic deadlines for use of federal transportation funds
would help local jurisdictions deliver complex projects without running afoul of
federal time limits which are unrealistically tight for complex projects.
138. SUPPORT efforts to coordinate development of state-funded or regulated
facilities such as courts, schools, jails, roads and state offices with local planning.
The County supports preserving the authority of Public Works over County roads
by way of ensuring the Board of Supervisors’ control over County roads as
established in the Streets & Highways Code (Ch2 §940) is not undermined . This
includes strongly opposing any action by a non-local entity that would ultimately
dilute current Board of Supervisors discretion relative to road design and land
use.
139. SUPPORT efforts to coordinate planning between school districts and local
jurisdictions in locating and planning new schools and funding programs that
foster collaboration and joint use of facilities to help finance off-site transportation
improvements for access to schools. The County supports the California
Department of Education’s current effort to better leverage sc hool facilities in
developing sustainable communities. Related to this effort, the County supports
reform of school siting practices by way of legislative changes related to any new
statewide school construction bond authorization. The County takes the position
that reform components should include bringing school siting practices in to
alignment with local growth management policies, safe routes to school best
practices, State SB 375 principles, and the State Strategic Growth Council’s
“Health in All Policies Initiative.”
140. SUPPORT regional aviation transportation planning efforts for coordinated
aviation network planning to improve service delivery. Regional aviation
coordination could also improve the surrounding surface transportation system
by providing expanded local options for people and goods movement.
141. SUPPORT efforts to increase waterborne transport of goods and obtaining funds
to support this effort. The San Francisco to Stockton Ship Channel is a major
transportation route for the region, providing water access to a large number of
industries and the Ports of Sacramento and Stockton. A project is underway to
deepen the channel, providing additional capacity to accommodate increasing
commerce needs of the Ports and providing better operational fle xibility for the
other industries. Increased goods movement via waterways has clear benefits to
congestion management on highways and railroads (with resultant air quality
benefits).
Adopted 2013 Platform 28
Waste Management
142. SUPPORT legislation that establishes producer resp onsibility for management of
their products, including pharmaceuticals, at the end of their useful life.
143. SUPPORT efforts to increase the development of markets for recycled materials.
144. SUPPORT legislative and regulatory efforts to allow third parties, und er specific
circumstances and conditions, to collect and transport household hazardous
waste to collection facilities.
145. SUPPORT legislation that seeks to remedy the environmental degradation and
solid waste management problems on a State -wide basis of polystyrene
containers and single-use plastic bags typically given away for free at grocer y,
retail and other establishments.
146. SUPPORT legislation that does not require increased diversion from landfills
without out an adequate funding mechanism.
147. SUPPORT legislation that would make changes to the used tire redemption
program. Instead of collecting a disposal fee from the consumer when new tires
are purchased, a disposal fee would be collected at the wholesale level and
redeemed by the disposal site when the used tires are brought to the site. The
party bringing the tires to the disposal site would also receive a portion of the fee.
148. SUPPORT legislation that relieves counties with privately-operated landfills from
the state requirement for maintaining a 15-year supply of disposal capacity for
waste generated within each county. In 1989, Contra Costa County amended its
general plan to accommodate construction of Keller Canyon Landfill. Due to the
difficulty in siting landfills and the requirements of Public Resources Code 47100
– Countywide Siting Element, the County maintained authority to control the
amount of waste disposed at this facility from outside the county. Despite Contra
Costa County’s opposition, AB 845 will become law on January 1, 2013 and
prohibit any jurisdiction from regulating the amount of waste disposed at a
privately-operated landfill based on its place of origin.
Because local jurisdictions can no longer control importation of waste to
privately-operated landfills, the host County will have a greater need to undertake
the difficult task of identifying new disposal capacity pursuant to the Countywide
Siting Element requirement. Since the state believes there is no need for local
jurisdictions to regulate disposal of solid waste by place of origin, the state should
remove existing statutes that require each County with privately -operated landfills
to identify sufficient disposal capacity for the waste generated by the jurisdictions
within that County.
Contra Costa County 29
149. SUPPORT legislation that can reduce the amount of harmful pharmaceuticals
that ultimately enter waste water treatment facilities and landfills.
150. SUPPORT legislative and regulatory efforts to restrict payments from the
Beverage Container Recycling Program Fund for redemption of beverage
containers sold out of state. Fraudulent redemption of these beverage
containers is costing the Fund from $40 million to $200 million annually. This
fraud combined with loans to the General Fund to reduce the State budget deficit
has significantly reduced the availability of funds for increasing recycling as
intended under the law.
151. SUPPORT legislative and regulatory efforts that correct the imbalance between
the County’s regulatory authority to control the collection and disposal of solid
waste generated within the unincorporated areas and our exposure to state
penalties for failing to meet state mandates for diverting solid waste generated
within these areas as a result of Appellate Court decisions. These decision
awarded solid waste franchise authority to the Rodeo Sanitary District and
Mountain View Sanitary District while the County remains exposed to state
penalties for failing to meet state mandates for reducing solid waste generated in
these areas.