Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAboutMINUTES - 02021999 - C81 Contra TO: BOARD OF SUPERVISORS ' FROM: DENNIS M. BARRY, AICP County COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT DIRECTOR DATE: February 2, 1999 SUBJECT: Annual Compliance Checklist for Measure 0-1988 SPECIFIC REQUEST(S) OR RECOMMENDATION(S) & BACKGROUND AND JUSTIFICATION HEMMMENDADQNS APPROVE the completed Annual Compliance Checklist (Exhibit A); AUTHORIZE the Chair of the Burd of Supervisors to sign the completed Annual Compliance Checklist(Exhibit A); and FIND that the County's policies and programs conform to the requirements for compliance with the Centra Costa Transportation Improvement and Growth Management Program. FISCAL IMPACT Approval of the Annual Compliance Checklist (Checklist) qualifies the County to receive its 1999199 allocation of Measure C-1988 "return to source" revenues, estimated to be approximately $1.9 million. CONTINUED ON ATTACHMENT: YES SIGNATURE RECOMMENDATION OF COUNTY ADMINISTRATOR RECOMMENDATION OF BOARD COMM EE APPROVE OTHER SIGNATURE (S): ACTION OF BOARD ON j dy APPROVED AS RECOMMENDED .R VOTE OF SUPERVISORS I HEREBY CERTIFY THAT THIS IS A TRUE ® UNANIMOUS (ABSENT ) AND CORRECT COPY OF AN ACTION TAKEN AYES-.;Z" ` NOES- zyAND ENTERED ON THE MINUTES OF THE ABSENT: hi ohiE. ABSTAIN- BOARD OF SUPERVISORS ON THE DATE SHOWN. Contact: Daniel J. 'Pulony AICP (925/335-1241) ATTESTEDZ��✓ y OYP ric.: Community Development cc: Public Works Department PHIL BATCHELOR, CLERK OF Sheriff's Office THE ARD OF SUPERVISORS CC`T"A (via CDD) AND OUNTY MINI T ATOR B ^--- - , DEPUTY DP:j! - J:Voups',odadpool'yani tboitnaaso.11s tJ� to ?'��'•''�.'��''�`' ........... Prf bi CA 21. cr 00 cr�a r No 00 rr • iMrU3;%>ii�iir'3;i:i�i` •r'� N ✓`s � N c U U G v es . :� 4 :>;:... u �. a f }y �^ s%f C t3. Cyd»»;�><`•s>>:;�: y, U i � N U .p > > v rh eq m >_< >' z 49 c ,a a ix .. i/�� iF�;;is;,•'. fi}r 00 cr cr ► v, -- a to w y # �, . .Iz aCA '4 k4e g �'„ • /y � s�," �`y �+"S � � it � f7++��� 4 JIM 0, CA c < :< 0 IS ti £ $ F-H Ut r�► ix < > <> < `:''` ' > 49 .................................... ................................................................................................ ......... ......... ......... ..................... .. ......... ......... ............... .............. ....... ........ ......... ......... ................. .................................................... ............................................................................._........____. • a IrA ' .. CA cn40 xX 1.4 � n I.. v 1 �5 U � b r' Jt Ile '< * ';;<; via p t� Q c W Jt ED N N .mac x " U X- :?," 33 . .: CA CA tar a aq ------------- oo ` ca �? U sa U 3 � S � H `svgs Sc� �. A 4.1 : ` w N c: ,fro' NMI 4 AA Lrr .. w � w f v 00 .. .. was a >`< > < iT yr yt. gel - i tA t' :: t CA r: :. w� lei ol Ito tw e fn y 00 az CL kn zn vs w � w iiiji b°ci i'�i;°'4.E;y'?'i?:v5'ri� •i a W sa as mgt � +Al ♦• .a+'3 ea i::::��S►i�:i!ii:::2:;i::ii: ��}y ti V f`V V' ��ry• Rt cot go ,.: c o c is:':�;:,: ,:•:}i:... w �y �P?i;}n• � � � Mil � j++t+rri�i� f, bi 6n it CA CA rA yam, yI�+14♦ {iMi ;`:;:f frr?,Yi'•''• ,v U c� �Q >;;r;:.<.�s>" €� • � � spa ji mijiiiiij red o ppa�yy ��y fJli F.bt ♦pnt�11� �1 �q •1 F�I.V v YM C14 srf W' �! R/ ♦fri MC q �y sat CL 94W 00 �y�✓J fir? �r' ' it ..�:�� N4i � ~� � y�eyy`r .+rte. �y��y♦ s♦ � �� •rfg '� 11.11 • "� � 'i� � '•�. YYY rA ' `�,: � '���{'`` " Ors `' v1► � 5 t 96 j r�Ti? Fr a a ate.. LA yam# �ii♦ # � ♦! :r::�!:;i:; IL ' 00r =T v, -4 t c`a th V !wM iG �+ -.y 444 :•.;.:sr::•;�.y'�'''::i: .+ . Y+ ATTACHMENT„B" INFORMATION REQUESTED BY CHECKLIST QUESTION 1.c MEASURE-C COMPLIANCE CHECKLIST: CALENDAR 1998 (GPAs Only) Affect the Ability To: Meet Growth Implement Meet RTPC Results of Management Action TSOs Reviewed RTPC General Plan Amendments& Protects Element Plan Review lConsistent with Genual Plans Standards Policies (GPAs) (GPAs) Pleasant Hill BART Station Area Specific Pian/General Plan Amendment ; Change Land Use Dasgination from Office, Multi-Family, and Commercial to Mixed Use, Park/Recreation, and Public/ Semi-Public, resulting,in a reduction of No conflict land use intensity. It also eliminates the with Action Southern Pacific Right-of-Way Arterial, Yes Yes Yes Yes Plan BOS resolution#981585 I MEA98,XLS Page 1 1126195 Comto "Carty t � or sx>�>:a�soxs yaws1taa:-vey Z. iragdon Director of Cosarunity Davelopa ant DAM stay :5, ztss ATTACHMENT C sossms VCD Reviev of County sousing ziaa &nt A TFI C VzsZ ITT ta lox!is) I 1=50—m rVITUICIMS U`m=&ZjoxS XMC}Wb=01 )MCrM of latter eros the state Departsent of Sousing and Co=unity Developsent, finding that the Countyes adopted dousing slaaaant ooatpliss vitas state sousing Zlesent Lay. None. Article 10.i of the California Goverment Code requires cities and counties to adopt a Housing Llestnt of the General Man. On Decaasber 15, 1493, the County adopted an Amendsent to its Gessaral Plan Rousing zissent. The state oopartsent of sousing and C=munity Developasnt has found that the December 15, 1#93 sousing slsaant oomplies with the statutory requirwnnts. 0=,&Zvv OX A221CXXXNTS Ims S:Cnxmt ?4� ewll ccm1 � so �► oxo s;GOMTORS cs>t cara Bahl ow Dram is- aaaammVr7W,. . •oTs Of mxxvzsoa z anal CsmTzrY VMT MI is a VXXN wcs tar"SnTaut an tCiUSCT Conry or As asst mss`s a►lsxox is`:rd= A= 3WT"Z as t, Tazx t xzarc; is or fn nua car 507SIVISORs oat in UTZ ts0lE7it. Y is Swuledy i�f•�CT6 sae Coity Developaant County Adainistrater ATTssTID countCLIU 5F County Counel "IL sousing Authority m � orsir�raca y2sus Contra Costa Transportation Authority an CCsvm AxaaKzxzsT"Tsxar< 037v" • oma• < ! �d .A -TE Of Ct NtA• StNESS TRAN SPGPMATION AND MOU SIN A ENC"fi pWILSON.t30vetnar DEPPATMENT OF HOUSING AND COMMUNtlY DEVELOPMZW DrVISION of HOUSING POLICY DEVELOPMENT °• . Y.O sox#X= h'• '�� SACIAN TO,CA ►2033 (016)33'3174 rAX('Io U3."u �`" '"''' ' April .30, 2.993 ° . Mr. Phil Batchelor County Administrator Contra Costa County County Administration Building 555 Pine Street Martinez, California 94553 Dear Mr. Batchelor: RE: R*view of the County of Contra Costa's Adopted sousing Bleman.t Thank you for submitting the County of Contra Costa's housing element,- adopted on December 55, 1992, and received for our review on December 31., 5993. As you know, we are required to review adopted housing elements and report our findings to the locality (Gover=ent Code Section 65595 {h) ) . we congratulate the County for establishing an ambitious schedule of program actions to facilitate the development of housing in Contra Costa County. As you know, our December 54, 1992 review letter found the County's draft element adequately addressed the statutory requiraments of housing element law, provided certain revitions necessary to accommodate the Countyts new construction need for Iowar-income households were included in the element. The adopted element includes the necessary changes. We are therefore pleased to find that the Countyls, adopted housing element also ° complies with State housing eliment law (Article 1O.S of the Government Cada) , including requirements regarding the preservation of assisted multifamily housing at, risk of converting to non-low-income uses pursuant to Chapter 5451, Statutes of 1999. OU- finding of compliance is based on the County's continued c6m. itment to accommodate its share of the regional dousing need for lower-income households. The County is planning to achieve this objective by the .following methods: by pa=nting multifamily construction at densities sufficient to Mr• Phil Batchelor Page 2 -facilitate the development of lower-income housing need, by the county's continued facilitation of the development of 0ome .11#000 total units, including some 21308 high density vultifami.ly units in the Dougherty Valley, and by application of the County's inclusionary ordinance to the Dougherty Valley so that 2.,750 units will be affordable in at least the following ratio: 10 percent very low.:,- 35 percent low- and 65 percent roderate- income. we strongly encourage the County to promote the early development of lower-income units in the Dougherty Valley. Failure by the County to facilitate the availability of the Dougherty 'Valley high density sites would leave the County with a lack of sites for lower-income households. -If ther-i sites do not become available as planned, the County should ame:id � the element to include additional sites for lower-income housing sufficient to meet Contra Costa County's regional share need. we look forward to following the County's progress in ;implementing the housing program when progress repo-ts are filed with the Department pursuant to Government Code Se .tion 65400. As you ray know, Chapter 889, Statutes of 1991, new rewires an annual submittal of these reports to this Department. we wish you continued success in implementing your housing program. of we can assist the County in this effort, please contact Robert Daus of our staff .at (916) 327.2640. in accordance with their requests pursuant to the Public Records Act, we are forwarding a copy of this letter to the individuals listed below, ` Sincerely, a Thomas B. cook Deputy Director Mr, Pbi.l Batchelor Page 3 ,cc. aames Xennedy, Contra Costs. County Dennis Barry, Contra Costa County Ma.tt .'Tomas, Contra Costa County Laura Blair, Sedway and Associates Miye Goi,shea, Contra Costa Legal Services Foundation Nancy Strohl, Contra Costa Legal Services Foundation Gen njioka, Asian Law Caucus Charles Klinge, Attorney at Law David Sooher, California Housing Council Sue. Seestor, Attorney at Law Gary Hao ly, ,Building Tzdustry Association Rolf Pendall, Say A.-ea Council Revan Ab F. Trasteer, Association of Say Areca Governments Cathleen MMikkelson, Deputy A.tt0=*y General Bob Cervantes, Governor's Office of Planning and Research Dwight Hanson, California Building Zndustry.Association xerry Hs.rrington Morrison, California Association of Realtors Marc Brown, California Rural Legal Assistance Foundation Rob Wiener, California Coalition ,for mural Housing Susan DeSantis, The Planning Center ATTACHMENT D Information Rfauect d for ChPchillst Ctvec110n 5h, TIST OF U2ORTING tNrMRSECTIONS AM LOS EMIT IS 1997 LAS Central Counly AM PM 1. Solano/Imhoff/Arnold Industrial Way A A 2. Solano Avenue/Olivera/Marsh Drive A A 3. Oak Road/Las Juntas Way A A 4. Oak Road/Jones A A 5. Oak Road/BART Station Entrance A A 6. Oak Road/Wayne Drive A A 7. Buskirk Avenue/Wayne Drive A A S. Newell Avenue/Olympic Boulevard A A 9. Tice Valley Boulevard/Olympic Boulevard A B Crntthw .s O = 10. Blackhawk Road/Blackhawk Plaza A A 11. Blackhawk Road/Silver Maple A A Fast COU= 12. Port Chicago Highway/Riverside A A 13. Cypress Road/Sellers Ave. A A West Caunly 14. Willow Avenue/Hawthome Drive A A 15. Parker Avenue/4th Street A A 16. Parker Avenue/2nd Street A A 17. Pomona Avenue/2nd Street A A ftle:c:\tpc\L0S97.t1 Annual Compliance Checklist for Measure C-1998 February 2, 1999 Page 2 BACKGROUNDIR ASONS FOB RECOMMENDATIONS The County annually submits a compliance checklist to the Contra Costa Transportation Authority (Authority) to receive the County's portion of the 18 percent of sales tax funds available for local street maintenance and improvements. Of the $9.6 million in "return to source" funds available county wide for Fiscal Year 1998199, the County is eligible to receive $1.9 million. The County General Plan provides the policies and program that enable the County to comply with the Measure C-19B8 Growth Management Program. The Checklist (see Exhibit A) was completed based on these policies and programs. The Authority requires that the Board review and approve the completed Checklist, and finds that the County's policies and programs conform to the Measure C-1988 Growth Management Program. The Checklist covers actions and decisions taken by the County during the 1998 calendar year. The Checklist covers the following areas: Complying with Action Plans for Routes of regional Significance; - Participating in the regional traffic mitigation program; Providing housing options and job opportunities; Complying with performance standards for traffic and other urban services; Participating in cooperative multi-jurisdictional planning; Maintaining a Five-Year Capital Improvement Program; Implementing a Transportation System Management ordinance; Muting minimum expenditures for street and road maintenance; and Posting signs for construction projects receiving more than $250,000 in Measure C funds. The County has satisfied all Checklist requirements during 1998. Only one development project approved by the Board of Supervisors, the Pleasant Dill SART Station Area General Plan Amendment, required detailed study for compliance with the Growth Management Element of the General Plan. All traffic level of service standards and performance standards for other urban services in the unincorporated area were maintained. The County implemented all the required plans, programs and ordinances for mitigating local and regional impacts of development projects, providing housing and job opportunities, and constructing necessary capital improvements for urban services. County road projects and expenditures have met the Measure C-1988 requirements. The Board of Supervisors has participated in or taken other actions during the year consistent with the multi-jurisdictional transportation planning process established by Measure C- 1988. NSEQ EN ES CE EC-4ADVE ACTIQN Failure to approve the Checklist will prevent the County from qualifying for its Fiscal Year 1998/99 allocation of "return to source" funds. Funds will be available for allocation beginning April 1, 1999. Because of the Authority's review process, the Board must submit the Checklistto the Authority by February 2, 1999 in order to be able to receive "return to source" funds when they become available April 1. s. EXHIBIT A COKrM COSTA MNSPORTA77t7N AUfHORR Y GROWTH MANAGEMENT PROGRAM Allocation of 186 Local Street Maintenance&improvement Fonds For Fiscal Year 1998.09 Reporting Period. Calendar Year 1998 Compliance Checklist Reporting Jurisdiction: st gMMt 1. Aeon glans YES NO a. Is the jurisdiction implementing the actions called for in the applicable Action Plan for Routes of Regional Significance for all designated Regional Routes within the jurisdiction? b. Has the jurisdiction implemented the following procedures as outlined in the applicable Action plan for Routes of Regional Significance? L Circulation of environmental documents, u. Analysis of the impacts of proposed(knerral pian Amendments and recommendation of changes to Action Pians,and iii. Conditioning the approval of projects consistent with Action Plan policies? c. Has the jurisdiction followed the procedures for RTPC review of General Pian Amendments as called for in the attached flow chart?. 2. Regional Transportation Mitigation Program YES NO a. Has the jurisdiction adopted and implemented a local,development [21 0 mitigation program to ensure that new development prays its fair share of the impact mitigation costs associated with that development? b. Has the jurisdiction adopted and implemented a regional transportation 0 0 mitigation program,including regional traffic mitigation fees, assessments,or other mitigation as appropriate? (Note.The Authority has W a deadline of April 15, 1998 for jurisdictions to adopt and implement a regional mitigation program.) Compliance Chedciist Page 7 Compliance Checklist ° Reporting Jurisdiction: Contra Costa Coin Fiscal Year. 1998-09 Reporting Period: Calendar I M 3. Housing Options and Job Opportunities YES NO a. Has the jurisdiction adopted a Housing Element that has been found by the 0 State Department of Housing and Community Development to comply with State Law? b. Has flee jurisdiction adopted a Housing Element that complies with the El 0 eaquirements of§65583 et seq.of the Government Code,by: • Identifymgg local responsibilities for meeting regional housing needs, • Establishing goals and policies for meeting those needs,and • Outlining a 5-year program of actions to implement the Housing Element? c. Does the jurisdiction's General Plan--or other adopted policy document or report—evaluate the effects of planned land uses on local,subregional and regional travel patterns and propose land use policies and a pattern of land uses that would promote more efficient use of the transportation system? 4. Growth Management dement: Performance Standards YES NO a. As part of its General Plan,has the jurisdiction adopted a Growth FRI Q Management Element which is in substantial compliance with the Authority's Model Growth Management Element? b. Does the jurisdiction now comply with adopted performance stndards,or FRI 1:1 expect to comply with the standards within the next five years through implementation of its Capital improvement Program? Compliance Cheddist Wage 2 .................................... ....................................................................................... ........................................................................................................____.. ......... ......... ........ ......... .... ......... ........ ......... ......... .......... .... s Compliance Checklist Reporting Jurisdiction: Contra Costa County Fiscal Year 1998-99 Reporting Period: Calendar 1998 6. Growth Management Element: Traffic Level-of- Service Standards YES NO N/A a. Using the Authority's Technical Procedures,have traffic impact studies 91 0 been conducted as part of development review for all projects estimated to generate more than 100 peak-hour vehicle trips? YES NO b. Does the jurisdiction maintain a list of Reporting Intersections on non- ED D regional routes,and measure the level of service at those intersections every two years? c. Do all Reporting Intersections meet LAS standards through actual measurement,or after assuming implementation of five-year capital improvement program and accounting for changes in travel demand? YES NO NIA d. Does a request for Findings of Special Circumstances for those 11 IKI intersections that do not and will not meet LOS.standards,accompany this checklist? e. Has the jurisdiction ever been granted a Findings of Special Circumstances by the Authority? 6. Participation in Cooperative, Multi-Jurisdictional Planning YES NO a. Over the past year,has the jurisdiction's Council/Board member regularly participated in meetings of the appropriate Regional Transportation Planning Committee,and have the jurisdiction's local representatives to the Regional Transportation Planning Committee regularly reported on the activities of the Regional Committee to the jurisdiction's council or board? (Note: Each RTPC should have a policy which dunes what constitutes regular attendance ofCouncil/Board members at RTPC meetings.) Compliance Checklist Page 3 Compliance Checklist Reporting Jurisdiction: Contra Costa County Fiscal Year: 1898•-99 Reporting Period: Calendar 1998 6. Participation in Cooperative, Multi-Jurisdictional Planning YES NO b. As needed,has the jurisdiction made available,as input into the 10 countywide transportation computer model,data on land use and traffic patterns? 7. Five Year Capital improvement Program YES NO Does the jurisdiction have an adopted five-year capital improvement 10 E program(CII')that estimates project costs and includes a plant that outlines general mechanisms for financing transportation and public facilities,including fire,police,panics,sanitary facilities,water and flood control? 8. Transportation Systems Management Program YES NO Has the jurisdiction adopted a transportation systems management ordinance that incorporates required policies consistent with the updated model ordinance prepared by the Authority for use by local agencies? (Note: The Authority's model TSM ordinance was updated on December 18, 1996. Each jurisdiction has until.lune 30, 1998 to update its TSM Ordinance to reflect the new model.) J. Maintenance of Effort YES NO Has the jurisdiction met the maintenance of effort requirements of M El Measure C as stated in Section 6 of the Contra Costa Transportation Improvement and Growth Management Ordinance? 10. Posting of Signs YES NO NIA Has the jurisdiction posted signs meeting Authority specifications for all projects exceeding$250,000 that are funded,in whole or in part,with Measure C funds? Compliance Checklist Page 4 _...... _....... ................................................................................... Compliance Checklist Reporizng Jurisdiction: Contra Costa County Fiscal Year: 199"S Reporting Period: Calendar 1999 11. Cather Considerations YES N/A If the jurisdiction believes that the requirements of Measure C have been satisfied in a way not indicated on this checklist,please attach an explanation. 12. Review and Approval of Checklist This checklist was prepared by: Signature: A Date: 11 151 ,dame and Title: car Phone: 276 The Contra Costa County Board of Supervisors has reviewed the completed checklist and found that the policies and programs of the jurisdiction as reported herein conform to the requirements for compliance with the Contra Costa Transportation Improvement and Growth Management Program Certified Signature: Mate--Z , Flame and Title: ilka it Attest Signature: Clerk of the Board, By Deputy Compliance Checklist Page 5 S CONTRA COSTA TRANSP©RTAT70M AUTHORITY GROWTH MANAGEMENT PROGRAM Allocation of 18% Local Street Maintenance& Improvement Funds For Fiscal Year 1998=99 Reporting Period: Calendar Year 1998 Attachments Reporting Jurisdiction. Contra Costa County , (Note: This form Is available in electronic media on WordPerfect or Word.) Information Requested by Checklist Question 1. Action Pians a. Please summarize steps taken during last year to implement the actions,programs, and measures called for in the applicable Action Pkmr for Routes of Regional Significance: See Attachment A,Actions, programs,and measures that do not include Contra Costa County are not listed. C. Attach, list and briefly describe any General Plan Amendments that were approved during the reporting period Please sped which amendments q#ected ability to meet .the standards in the Growth Management Element andlor affected ability to implement Action Plan policies or meet Traffic Service Objectives. Indicate if amendments were forwarded to the jurisdiction's RTPC for review, and describe the results of that review relative to.Action Plan implementation: See Attachment B 2. Regional Transportation Mitigation Program b. Describe progress on development andlor implementation of the regional mitigation program. If under development, what is the anticipated date of adoption of the program? Contra Costa County has been implementing regional mitigation programs in Wes,Centra Earn and,South County Areas. 3. Housing Options and Job Opportunities a. Please list the date of State Department of Housing and Community Development(HCD) compliance finding far the-jurisdiction's Housing Element and attach the HCD letter: 04130193,See Attachment C Checklist Attachments Page t Compliance Checklist Reporting Jurisdiction: ----Contra Costal County Fiscal Year 1998-99 Reporting 'period: Calendar 1998 b. If the(lousing Element was not found in conWlimwe, please list the date of adoption and resolution number of the jurisdiction's resolutionftxnding that the Housing Element complies with State law Also state wheat actions have been taken during the reporting period to contribute toward achieving the housing allocations established by ABAt for all income levels. N.A. 4. growth Management dement.-Performance Standards a ff the jurisdiction does not currently meet its adopted performance standards,please describe what actions the jurisdiction intends to take to bring it into compliance within the next five years, including actions contained in the adopted five-year capital improvement program: N.A. S. Growth Management Element.- Traffic ement:Traffic Level of Service (LOS) Standards a. Please fist all projects that,generated more than 100 peak hour trips, indicate whether a traffic impact study was conducted, and indicate if a Findings of Consistency with Standard's was made(include resolution number): Attachment.B fists the County approvedproject,j'e'ct,generating more than 100 peak hour traps, during the 1998 calendar year. b. Please list Reporting Intersections, dates of counts and LOS monitoring results. Also attach LOS calculations. Explain reasons for any LOS exceedances and proposed mitigation through implementation of the 5-year CIP or other mechanism. See Aaachment D, The traffic count and LOS calculations were included in Inst yearns Checklist and satisfy this biennial regrrirement C. Please list intersections for which flee Authority has adopted findings of Special Circumstances and describe actions taken over the past year to carry out required conditions of compliance: N.A. Checklist Attachments Page 2 Compliance Checklist Reporting Jurisdiction: Contra Costa County Fiscal Year. 1998-99 Reporting Period: Calendar 1998 7. Five Year Capital Improvement Program (CIP) Please list resolution number and date of adoption of most recent,five year C"IR If CIP implementation is required to meet standards(see 4.b and 5.6 above)state the number of years for which this condition has prevailed ` CIPfor Parks and Sheriff Facilities, 1998-2004,Adopted 2/3/98(C48) County Road Improventent Progratt4 199 71198-2003/04,Adopted 3/17198(D. 8) These CIPS, although adopted in 1998,cover a seven year period and satisfy the CIP requirement for this year. g. Transportation Systems Management Program Date of Ordinance Adoption y 6. '997 Resolution Number(3rd No. 9 7-12 9. Maintenance of Effort(MoE) Please indicate the jurisdictions MoE requirement and MoE expenditures for the past fiscal year. MoE Standard=$420,064 MoE Expenditures=$1.2-$1.5 nt llivn, depending on final accounting for these expenditures(which has not been completed at this time), FY 1998199 11 . Other Considerations Please sped any alternative methods of achieving compliance for any components for the Measure C Growth Management Program. Checklist Attachments Wage 3 r�* 121 rptFt ` r Vp a :1 is"•': .. ::::: ' �:ri:�:ti•ii:q� •.•...:::4i;C4ii i i:kR�:::• ht•}iii:}?ii•�ii:`?:- J� ra a C') rr =ef > Fr CA . rr 'r, ffi Ilk Ir`CA rr ° ��ire w r `•r > o� °� to a � � rrt v i):o::>:�:'�is f+` W y �.1 • M°S.1 ' �.I • 4+1 Q w Er EA w pC7 s " _ •��iap •�r. oe ttiT� mc.4 GNdb G7 �j{yy �^• 4., f ;F 6 <'rS iP:1ri,:x i;I��,SS6;��:'•iiit' pY' ?;fry tS �i . LTI 4. 13 ; , . W ,art; moi, 6 . '� r -0ftl 3 s ::irlrWtw-N ls� :< <' Y# � 'u U 'v p � v V e-+ b 19 ao 0 .9 040.. V >; 0 3 3 se °''.. tC0 00 rA in Soll ta CA rA 1 ° P, , G7 `` w vo N CL o to td U � 00 cn 4n 0 U c� r.� C O 0 � E � , max c r� 3 F 0 c `''err d•. h• Q � � !!!R2 rJ U � '� •C ado � •� C� OCF s .............