The URL can be used to link to this page

Home My WebLink AboutMINUTES - 12121995 - C60 1/0 L TO: BOARD OF SUPERVISORS 1'0'-2 `"'S' Contra Costa FROM: INTERNAL OPERATIONS COMMITTEE F � ` � . County V DATE: December 4, 1995 r�rT�coil * SUBJECT: AGRICULTURE AND OPEN SPACE PRESERVATION KELLER MITIGATION TRUSTFUND SPECIFIC REQUEST(S)OR RECOMMENDATION(S)&BACKGROUND AND JUSTIFICATION RECOMMENDATIONS: 1. CONCUR with the priorities of the Contra Costa County-East Bay Regional Park District Liaison Committee to the effect that the four following programs should be funded for a second year in the amount indicated: ❑ Trail Maintenance: $90,000 per year ❑ Environmental Science Center: $65,000 per year ❑ Biodiversity: $20,000 per year ❑ Wetland Mitigation: $15,000 per year TOTAL $190,000 per year 2. REQUEST that the Finance Committee recommend the funding priorities for the remaining $118,000 which is apparently available for the Agriculture and Open Space Preservation category. BACKGROUND: On October 17, 1995, the Board of Supervisors, on the recommendation of the Finance Committee asked that the Internal Operations Committee make recommendations for funding for the Agriculture and Open Space Preservation category of funds available from the Keller Canyon and Acme Transfer Station Mitigation funds. The Contra Costa County-East Bay Regional Park District Liaison Committee (EBRPD Liaison Committee) was also asked to consider funding for this same category. CONTINUED CONTINUED ON ATTACHMENT: YES SIGNATURE: RECOMMENDATION OF COUNTY ADMINISTRATOR RECOMMENDATION OF BOARD COMMITTEE APPROVE OTHER SIGNATURE(S): ACTION OF BOARD ON December 17 1995 APPROVED AS RECOMMENDED — OTHER VOTE OF SUPERVISORS I HEREBY CERTIFY THAT THIS IS A TRUE —UNANIMOUS(ABSENT ) AND CORRECT COPY OF AN ACTION TAKEN AYES: NOES: AND ENTERED ON THE MINUTES OF THE BOARD ABSENT: ABSTAIN: OF SUPERVISORS ON THE DATE SHOWN. ATTESTED December 12, 1995 Contact: County Administrator PHIL BATCHELOR,CLERK OF THE BOARD OF M. Community Development Director SUPERVISORS AND COUNTY ADMINISTRATOR Finance Committee (Via Tony Enea, CAO's Office) BY ,DEPUTY y I.O.-2 Our Committee was provided the attached report from staff outlining the actions which had been taken by the EBRPD Liaison Committee. We concur with the need and value in funding the four programs identified in Recommendation # 1 above in the amounts indicated. We recognize that there is an 18% reduction overall in available funding for 1995-96 compared with 1994-95. Funding the four programs identified above at their existing level will leave approximately $118,000 for remaining priorities in this category. We are not fully aware of the needs and priorities overall for the use of these funds nor do we feel we are in a position to recommend the disposition of the remaining funds. Since the Finance Committee has been providing oversight to the total funding from the Keller and Acme Mitigation Programs, we are willing to defer to the recommendations of the Finance Committee, providing that the four programs identified above are funded at the levels indicated. -2- Contra ��_ •' �� Costa TO: INTERNAL OPERATIONS COMMITTEE ,r FROM: HARVEY E. BRAGDON ;;. .ti County DIRECTOR OF COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT DATE: November 20, 199_ SUBJECT: AGRICULTURE AND OPEN SPACE PRESERVATION KELL7ER MITIGATION TRUST FUND SPECIFIC REQUEST(S) OR RECOMMENDATIONS) & BACKGROUND AND JUSTIFICATION RECOMMENDATIONS 1. The Contra Costa County-East Bay Regional Park District Liaison Committee supported the concept of a two year funding cycle to provide some assurances for program continuity. 2. The Committee's four main priorities were to continue funding, at current levels, to four critical programs. Trail Maintenance at $90, 000/year; Environmental Science Center at $65, 000/year; Biodiversity at $20, 000/year and Wetland Mitigation at $15, 000/year. 3. The Soils Bank should be renamed Agricultural Trust and Mitigation Bank and should be financed, should the Board move to establish the Agricultural Trust. 4. The Committee questioned if the Ambrose Recreation & Park District money was a short term grant or if the need to continue funding from this source was warranted. 5. The Committee didn't have Keller Mitigation Fund monetary projections, when it last met and consequently have no basis to determine priorities for the Rodent Thistle Program, Route Planting or the Audubon (ABC) program. Since the Committee won't meet until January, the IO Committee will need to resolve these funding levels. CONTINUED ON ATTACHMENT: YES SIGNATURE RECOMMENDATION OF COUNTY ADMINISTRATOR RECOMMENDATION OF BOARD COMMITTEE APPROVE OTHER SIGNATURE(S) : ACTION OF BOARD ON APPROVED AS RECOMMENDED OTHER VOTE OF SUPERVISORS I HEREBY CERTIFY THAT THIS IS A UNANIMOUS (ABSENT TRUE AND CORRECT COPY OF AN AYES: NOES: ACTION TAKEN AND ENTERED ON THE ABSENT: ABSTAIN: MINUTES OF THE BOARD OF SUPERVISORS ON THE DATE SHOWN. Contact: Jim Cutler (510 646-2034) ATTESTED cc: Community Development Department PHIL BATCHELOR, CLERK OF CAO - Tony Enea THE BOARD OF SUPERVISORS EBRPD - Rosemary Cameron AND COUNTY ADMINISTRATOR BY , DEPUTY JWC:drb JWC1995\drb\KellerCan-bo Agriculture and Open Space Preservation November 20, 1995 Page Two FISCAL IMPACT To be determined by the IO and Finance Committees. BACKGROUNDJJUSTIFICATION The Contra Costa County-East Bay Regional Park District Liaison Committee met on September 28,1995. They discussed the Open Space Keller Mitigation monies. At that time projections from the County Administrators Office projections of Keller Mitigation fund revenues were not available to the Committee. So they provided what guidance they could on the program merits. They supported a two year budget cycle. They felt the priority items to be supported were: Trail Maintenance $90,000 Environmental Science Center $65,000 Biodiversity $20,000 Wetland Mitigation $15,000 These were for each of a two year cycle. The funding of the Agricultural Trust would need to be based on Board of Supervisors action moving ahead with either an Agricultural Trust or Mitigation Bank. Without knowing the funding level which remained, the Committee took no action on the Rodent Thistle, Route Planting, Ambrose or Audubon (ABC) Programs. However, there was a questioning on if the Ambrose funding should continue into future years or if it was to be a one-time allocation. That would depend on the amount of revenue and information on how the budgeted funds had been used. i