Loading...
The URL can be used to link to this page
Your browser does not support the video tag.
Home
My WebLink
About
MINUTES - 10012002 - D.5
_ Contra Costa TO: BOARD OF SUPERVISORS County FROM: BOARD OF SUPERVISORS AD HOC COMMITTEE ON OPEN SPACE FUNDING SUPERVISOR DONNA GERBER SUPERVISOR JOHN GIOIA DATE: October 1, 2002 SUBJECT. Re art on Draft Pra _o ed Open" S ace Funding Measure SPECIFIC REQUEST(S) OR RECOMMENDATION(S) & BACKGROUND AND JUSTIFICATION RECOMMENDATION 1) ACCEPT report from Ad Hoc Committee on a Draft Proposed Open Space Funding Measure, including discussion of the need for open space funding, public involvement in framing the draft proposal', highlights of the draft measure, and recommended next steps. 2) CONCUR in principle with the general concept of the Draft Proposed Open Space Funding Measure. 3)AUTHORIZE the following actions to continue to frame and define the Draft Proposed Open Space Funding Measure: a) PRESENT draft measure to the November Mayers'Conference and if possible,to an upcoming meeting of the City/County Relations Committee; b) DIRECT staff to further explore the costs of and possible revenues for bringing the draft measure to an election; c) DIRECT staff to work with the Assessor, as needed, to develop preliminary statistics on the numbers and types of various categories of parcels in the County; d) DIRECT staff to circulate a Request For Proposals from assessment district engineers for creation of a countywide benefit assessment district for open space purposes. CONTINUED ON ATTACHMENT;' X YES SIGNATURE RECOMMENDATION OF COUNTY ADMINISTRATOR RECOMMENDATION OF BOARD COMMITTEE APPROVE OTHER SIGNATURES : SUPERVIS' DONNA GERBER SUPIERVISOR JOHN GIOIA ACTION OF BOARD ON _: October 1 , 2002 APPROVED AS RECOMMENDED x OTHER" x ACCEPTED report .from the AdRoc Committee on a Draft ;Proposed open Space Funding Measure, including discussion of the need for open space funding, public involve- ent ' n framing the draft ,proposal highlights of the draft measure, and rec- ommended next steps; and CONCURRED in principle with the 'general concept'; of the Draft Proposed open Space Funding Measure. (See addenduu for speakers,] VOTE OF SUPERVISORS HEREBY CERTIFY THAT THIS IS A TRUE x UNANIMOUS (ABSENT SONE ) AND CORRECT COPY OF AN ACTION TAKEN TAKEN AND ENTERED ON THE MINUTES AYES: NOES: OF THE BOARD OF SUPERVISORS'ON ABSENT: ABSTAIN: THE DATE SHOWN' Contact: John Kopchik (925-335-1227) ATTESTEDoctober 1 , c2-010y-- cc: Community Development Department (CDD) JOHN SWEETEN,CLERK OF County Administrator THE BOARD OF SUPERVISORS County Counsel;, AND COUNTY'ADMINISTRATOR Assessor Public Works Agricultural Commissioner / � G:1Conservation\open_spacelbos_initial /--report_10-1-02.doc BY 9 - � ,DEPUTY Report on draft Proposed Open Space Funding Measure October1,2002 Page 2 of 2 FISCAL IMPACT Modest staff costs to perform the tasks recommended above: BACKGROUND/REASONS FOR RECOMMENDATIONS On September 5, 2002, the Board of Supervisors' Ad Hoc Committee on Open Space Funding approved submission of a Draft Proposed Open Space Funding Measure to the full Board for an initial presentation and authorization of next steps needed to continue to frame and define the draft proposal. A'copy of the draft proposal, Draft Framework For An Open Space Protection and Enhancement Funding Measure For Contra Costa County„and a map illustrating key components of the proposal, are attached. This report provides additional background information on the public process through which this proposal has developed. Origins of County interest in this issue:The concept of developing a new local source of funding to acquire agricultural lands or conservation easements to conserve open space resources was initially raised in 1998 during Board discussions of the proposed Tassajara Agricultural Preserve. The Board requested a report from staff, Options for Funding the Acquisition and Protection of Open Space and Agricultural Lands in Contra Costa County,", to summarize the available funding mechanisms, As Board discussion shifted to amending the Urban Limit Line ("ULL"), the open space funding issue was referred to an Ad Hoc Committee examining the ULL and growth policy. Emerging as one component of the Board of Supervisors' Smart Growth strategy, open space funding was referred to the Finance Committee and considered together with tools'for promoting infill development. When the Board of Supervisors authorized polling in advance of the 1098 County Libraries ballot measure, the Board'requested that the poll also explore the issues of open space protection and economic revitalization. The results of the poll showed that while combining all three issues into one measure was not feasible, support for open space funding was quite strong (approx. 63%) given the early stage of discussions. The survey analyst concluded that "it should be possible to shape an acceptable'proposal over the next few years." The Board wished to continue exploration of this issue, and appointed Supervisors Gerber and Gioia to serve'on a new Ad Hoc Committee on Open Space Funding. Advisory Committee on Open Space Funding:To provide specific advice and input on the need'for and feasibility of developing a new source of local public funds for open space acquisition, the Ad Hoc Committee convened an open committee of 'individuals and organizations interested in this topic. This committee, the Advisory Committee on Open Space Funding,Megan meeting in January of 2000 and has met approximately every other month since that time. Any and all interested individuals and groups were invited to attend and participate (i.e., the Advisory Committee had no pre-defined membership and was completely open). A major portion of the Advisory Committee's activities throughout its process has involved recruiting participation from groups that might not have known about the effort otherwise, including landowners and agriculturalists, the business and labor communities, and city governments. Of course,;,a broad cross section of conservation organizations was also represented. At this time, the regular notification list for the Advisory Committee includes more than 200 individuals: and groups (please see Attachment B to the proposal for a copy of the list)'. An additional 200 individuals are on a separate list to receive periodic updates on the progress of the effort. Some key milestones in the work of the Advisory Committee include the following: • A kickoff workshop in April of 2000 at Diablo Valley College that attracted more than 150 participants (the Advisory Committee statement on the need for open space funding which was presented and augmented at the DVC meeting is attached); « Development of a list of eight general categories of open space in need of new funding. The::categories identified were: •+• Scenic landscapes&Regional Parks +t• Creeks/Watersheds +. Farmland' +.• Historic preservation Report on Draft Proposed OpenSpace Funding Measure October'1, 2002 Page 3 of 3 4- Local & Municipal Parks/Recreation Shorelines *:* Trails/Public Access Facilities 4- Wildlife habitat and corridors • Circulation of a request for proposals("RFP")foropen space"flagship„projects any where in the County consistent with ,at least one of the eight categories discussed above. This RFP was circulated to the entire 400-person mailing list. Approximately 50 proposals (totaling $250M) were received. These proposals became the foundation for framing the current Draft Funding Proposals. • Development'of the Draft Proposed Open Space Funding;.Measure, a task;that began in earnest in the summer of 2001 and has continued to be the focus of Advisory Committee work since that time. Subcommittee: A working subcommittee of the Advisory Committee directly compiled drafts of Advisory Committee work products for review by the larger group,and met several times a month during portions of the process. The contributions of Subcommitte members deserves special recognition. Subcommittee participants included': ,Ch sn tina(Salt Muir Heritage Land Trust .w .. _.. _ _...... jArthur Bonwell Save Mount Diablo ,Ron Brown �jSave Mount Diablo tRichard' Chambertain Town of Moraga Jim ;Cutler Planning Mediation&Environmental Srvcs �aav�d DolbsrgTrails for Richmond Action Committee(TRAC) i Bob Doyle East Bay Regional Park District Jody_ Jones';-— City of Walnut Creek IAnthonyNorris City of Richmond,Parks Department Steve Pardieck .__. Muir Heritage Land Trust _ iM�ke vukelehContra Costa Farm bureau i 'HermannjWeimContra Costa Economic Partnership Additional outreach: Staff and members of the Ad Hoc and Advisory Committees have made a number of presentations to outside organizations on the work to frame an Open Space Funding Measure. A partial list of groups to receive these detailed presentations so far includes: the Contra' Costa County Citizens Land Alliance; (Board and Annual Symposium); Sierra Club (Public Lands and West Contra Costa Committees); Contra Costa Council (full council and Land Use Task Force); and the Contra Costa Economic Partnership. Of course, Advisory Committee participants represented a broad array of interested organizations, and we expect most meeting attendees regularly updated their constituencies on the progress of the 'Advisory Committee. Additional detailed presentations by staff will likely be requested should the Board choose to move forward in its consideration of this proposal. Web site: Staff created a website for the Ad Hoc and Advisory Committee, and used that website as one means to transmit meeting materials to participants. The website contains an extensive:collection of past and present work products and background information on the effort. The website may be accessed at the following url http://www.co.contra-costa.ca.us/depart/cd/water/openspace.htm Attachments • Draft Proposed Open Space Funding Measure ("Draft Framework for an Open Space Protection and Enhancement'Measure for Contra Costa County") • Draft map illustrating key'components of the Draft Proposed Funding Measure • May 2000 statement by the Advisory Committee on the need for open space funding 1\Bl C D 91APPLtGROU PS\ConservW oh n�osforumauthfOO.doc --A,,.n,.DENDU D. October 1,2002 List of speakers: Bob Doyle, 2950 Realtors Oaks Court,Walnut Creek, Amelia Wilson, 35 Lost Valley, Orinda, Don Manning, 850 Sage Drive, Martinez; Ralph Hoffman,60 Saint Timothy Court,Danville, Arthur Bonwell 1788 Live Oak, Concord; Kristine Mazzei, TVBC,P.O`. Box 3258,Livermore DRAFT FRAMEWORK FOR AN OPEN SPACE PROTECTION ANIS ENHANCEMENT FUNDING MEASURE FOR CONTRA COSTA COUNTY Approved for initial referral to the Board of Supervisors on September S, 2002 by the Board of Supervisors'Ad Hoc Committee on Open Space Funding, Supervisors Donna Gerber and John Gioia. Originally recommended by the Contra Costa County Advisory Committee on Open Space Funding _M NMI ;:71 0 gg S i 0 b & ` r � I PURPOSE OF THE FUNDING MEASURE The Board of Supervisors created the Ad Hoc Committee on Open Space Funding to make recommendations on whether and how to create new local funding for open space, parks, recreation, natural resource, and farmland preservation needs throughout the County. To achieve this goal, the Ad:Hoc Committee convened an open committee of individuals and organizations interested in this topic to provide specific advice and input. After more than two and one-half years of meetings, this citizen committee, the Contra Costa County Advisory Committee on Open' Space Funding, has recommended a one hundred and thirty million-dollar ($130,000,000) funding measure to be,placed before the property owners of the County,`proceeds to be granted by the County to 'appropriate organizations to fill a'wide variety of open space needs. A. THE VALUE OF OPEN SPACE The variety of open spaces in Contra Costa County—from pristine natural"parks, scenic shorelines, and productive tracks of prime farmland to neighborhood parks, trails, and urban creeks--are a crucial component of the quality of life of local residents. Collectively, these open space resources provide many benefits: ° Places for people to hike, bicycle, play, findsolitude and otherwise enjoy the outdoors, ° Protection of the visual character, heritage, and beauty of the County; ° Food production for local residentsand the world; ° Habitat for a diverse range of plant and animal species; ° A physical setting and amenities which attract and retain businesses,jobs, a vibrant culture, and talented people; Opportunities for children and adults to team about and appreciate the County's human and natural history; A complement to sound, balanced land-use planning and efforts to address traffic problems. B. PRESENT CHALLENGES The booming regional economy can foster vibrant communities and create economic opportunity for County residents. However,this economic growth must be complemented with continued protection of our many open space resources if our duality of life is to be maintained. At the very least, we should build on the strong history of open space protection in this County and continue to provide parks and trails and other open space resources,to keep up with a 'growing population. But, if we wish to pass on to future generations a community that retains the attractions that drew us here, we need to identify those characteristics of the County that we most wish to protect and enhance, whether these be defining natural features—like Mount Diablo, the shoreline of San Francisco Bay, the Carquinez Straits, and Delta, or the, fertile farmland of East County'--or backyard open space resources--like neighborhood parks, urban creeks, scenic ridgelines, and hiking and biking trails—that make our developed and developing areas pleasant places to live and work. C. NEED FOR NEW LOCAL FUNDING Meeting the challenge of protecting open space in the future will require funding. The passage in 2000 and 2002 of state water and park bonds (Propositions 12, 13, and 40) will provide some funding, but substantial portions of the bond revenues will be set aside for competitive grants that require or encourage a local snatch. A new source of local funds is needed to leverage such sources and to, provide revenues adequate to meet future open space needs. Some additional reasons we need new local funding are provided below: Page 2 of 2 East° Bay Regional Parr. District's Measure AA was passed in 1988. Revenues from it are approximately 90% spent the remainder is entirely committed. City and local recreation districts are hard pressed to keep up with. building new facilities and renovating older facilities. ° Private non-profit organizations like land trusts, creek restoration and regional trail groups present opportunities for partnerships between the public and private sectors. ° New funding can complement and supplement the work of the EBRPD and extend local support to new types of conservation priorities such as protection of prime farmland and other types of agriculture, use of conservation easements, and restoration of urban creeks. The following comparison further illustrates that, despite past accomplishments, Contra Costa County now tags behind most other Bay Area counties in terms of open space per capita and future funding revenues. Com orison of Urbanization O n S`ace,and Future Open Space Fun ing Amonj I Say Area Counties Contra Costa Napa Marin Solano Sonoma San Mateo Santa Alameda Sart Clara Francisco Percent of land area that is 26.2% 3.5% 11.7% 8.6% 7.2% 19.9°/O 18.7% 25.5% 81.2% developed' Percent of land area available for develo meet' 9.5% 2.3% 5.7% 6.3% 1 6.9% 7.7%, 4.1°l0 7.5°l0 7.0% Acres of protected open .12 acres per .84 .70 .26 23 .14 .10 .08 .01 space per capital(Bay area person acres/ acres per acres/ acres per acres per acres per acres per acres/ avers a=;14 acres/person) person person person person person person person person Secure future funding for to =AA None On-going Solano '/4 cent O.S.Dist.has initiated a Measure AA N/A open spaces(does not city&grant- yet property tart County is sales tax a tax&bond, parcel tax (status same (parks include Proposition 12 and able portion increment now explor- for open but band is and an O.S. as CCC); dept. spent;EBRPD provides for Ing an OS space and nearly spent. District;In Landfill budget) ether state/federal sources— portion 80%4 acquisitions funding a county County has 2001,voters tipping fee to see below} spent,remain- measure open space parks dept.w/ approved a provide ing 200/6 atlo- district annual sawyear significant sated by park I I I bugget. assessment. o.s.funding, D. TYPES OF OPEN SPACE THAT NEED FUNDING' The following categories descriptions explain the variety of"Open Space actions that are needed in the County: Scenic Landscapes and Regional Parks—Preserve defining features of our landscape such as important ridgelines and other scenic landforms, green buffers, connections 'between existing parkland areas, and other'unique landscape or community features; CreekslWatersheds--Protect`& restore urban & ether creeks, watersheds, wetlands, and soil, and improve safety and flood plain management; r ABAG estimates from"Status and Trends 2000",based on data from 1995(ABAG Figures do not consider the County's 65/35 Ordinance which would restrict urbanization of the County to 35%of the land area) z Greentnfo Network, 1999 3 East Bay Regional Park District and Bay Area Open Space Council: Page 3 of 3 Farmland—Provide conservation easements, buffers, irrigation water or other protections for prime 'agricultural soils, range-land, and unique agricultural features; Historic preservation-Preserve historic structures and cultural resources; Local &Municipal ParkslRecreation—Enhance and create local parks to improve quality of life in our existing communities and complement revitalization efforts; replant the urban forest; Shorelines-Protect and restore the shorelines of the Bay and Delta and provide public access and recreation opportunities; TrailslPublic Access Facilities—Close gaps in major Bay Area trails such as the Bay Trail and Ridge Trail, unify and connect existing:regional trail systems, improve existing trail's, public access and equestrian access; Wildlife habitat and corridors-Protectlenhance the habitat of unique and valuable plants and animals. E. FUNDING PRINCIPLES The following principles should guide the formulation and implementation of the funding measure. These principles are intended to maximize the public benefit derived from the measure and to assure fair and equitable distribution of revenues. To provide funding to help complete major Open Space projects and programs of countywide impact, scale, or scope; ° To provide local matching funds to governmental agencies and non-profit groups as a way to attract State, Federal and Foundation funds to specific Open Space projects with the County; ° To provide per capita funds directly to local jurisdictions e.g., cities and local recreation agencies, and the County to fund park and recreation projects based on local need as determined by locally elected and appointed officials; ° To provide new methods for Open Space protection, including the appropriate use of conservation easements, connections among existing parks, and protection of urban creeks and prime farmland; ° To balance andcomplement the development of affordable .housing and workforce housing; ° To encourage continuation of private agricultural operations through purchase of conservation easements; To distribute the funds equitably throughout the County; o To balance funding between large projects of countywide impact with more localized projects and programs. These principles are the basis for the funding measure allocation categories and the criteria within each category. Page 4 of 4 II. GENERAL ALLOCATION OF FUNDS The general funding categories area Flagship projects $63,000,000 ° Regional priorities $27,200,000. Community priorities $27,700,000 ° Opportunity Reserve Fund $8,300,000 Administration $3.800,000 TOTAL: $130,0100,000 Depending on the type of funding mechanists used, a portion of some or all of the above funding categories may be recommended for allocation for open space stewardship. Proposed allocation of the$130M Community priorities Regional r(per capita) priorities 21% 21% Admin 3% Opportunity reserve fund 5a/ Flagship projects 5(}% i IIL DESCRIPTION OF FLAGSHIP PROJECTS Descriptions of these recommended Flagship projects are provided below. The attached - map shows the general locations of these recommended Flagship projects(alternatively referred to as"Flagship Opportunity Areas") that are budgetedfor$63,000,000. Page 5 of`5 A. MOUNT DIABLO PARK EXPANSIONS Mt. Diablo State Park is one of California's oldest and most heavily used. This park is in an area of intense development pressure. The very slopes of the mountain are threatened, including much of North Peak and major canyons an southern and eastern slopes. The mountain is home to many special status species. To protect these species, corridors of protected lands need to be made with other adjacent protected areas. $5,000,000 is set aside for additions to this park. Stephen Joseph B. SAN FRANCISCO BAY TRAIL COMPLETION In the 1990s, the California legislature adopted a bill identifying the need for 'a trail that would ring the San Francisco Bay and they provided some seed money to help in this development. The cost of construction was to be handled by local agencies. The IBRPD has built major segments of the trail but substantial gaps remain. By allocation of $5,000,000 to this trail, the Contra Costa 'County component of the trail could be completed. This includes the missing links between Richmond and Crockett. "These funds can be utilized for both right-of- way and trail construction costs. C. POINT SAN PABLO`PENINSULA This allocation will extend the shoreline corridor of West County from the Richmond-San Ra- fael Bridge to the tip of the San Pablo peninsula; Com- bined with the Point Molate area, this will 'bring the entire western side of the San Pablo Peninsula - over 1000 acres into public'use. The site offers approx- imately 5 continuous Provided by Trails for Richmond Action Committee Page 6 of 6 milesof shoreline and stunning views of Mount Tamalpais, San Francisco and San Pablo Bays to Solano County, as well as the San'Francisco skyline and at least three bridges. There are numerous recreational opportunities, including: hiking, biking and picnicking, a planned segment of the Bay Trail, two fishing and docking piers, two nationally registered historic sites (Winehaven and East Brother Light Station), and sites of former commercial shrimping, canning, whaling, fishing, shipping and ferry operations which tell an impressive story of Bay-related industries of the early twentieth century. $5,000,000 is set aside for this work. D. MUIR HERITAGE CORRIDOR .} Stephen Joseph This is the area where John Muir walked and worked when he wasn't traveling through the Sierras`. This:corridor has two distinct sections, both include portions of city/county designated"Briones Hills Agricultural Preservation Area. The first corridor connects Hercules together with Martinez along both sides of State Route 4. This land is primarily one of private cattle ranches. It is threatened'with being split up into large lot development. Acquisition of land conservation:easements, parklands, and protection of grazing lands will be pursued. $5,000,000 is allocated for this northem tier'of the corridor. The 'southern portion of the corridor flanks EBMUD and EBRPD lands on the boundaries of Lafayette and Orinda and extends west and south to include the Caldecott wildlife corridor. $3,000,000 is set aside for acquisitions to fill in the gaps between public lands and the existing development. Page 7 of 7 E. PRIME FARMLAND/AGRICULTURAL CORE Contra Costa County is fortunate to at retain some excellent farmlands The ` last largely contiguous farming area is located in the lands,east of Brentwood from Knight-sen to Byron. Home to nut and fruit trees and field craps, this area is an important natural and cultural resource. The State has a programto help purchase easements and Brentwood has launched an ambitious agricultural enterprise program:, but a countywide local match is needed to insure the State of our commitment to the program and to complement the efforts of the City of Brentwood. $5,000,000 is to be set aside for this CCC Department of Agriculture effort. F. NORTH CONTRA COSTA'WETLANDS AND RIVERFRONT As one of the defining features of the County, the Sart Francisco and San Pablo Bay-Delta system is the cornerstone of our visual amenities. While over the last 3 decades great strides have been made to acquire and open the waterfront to public use. There are however substantial gaps in public ownership. This category will provide funds for public agencies to fill those gaps. The funds can be spent from Pinole to Oakley on waterfront land acquisition, trail and facility development. Approximately half the funds will be spent between Pinole and Martinez within several hundred feet of the shoreline. The other half will be spent on the shoreline from the naval weapons station.to Bethel Island. $5,000,000 is reserved for these purposes, G. TASSAJARA 3 The Tassa'ara Valley y extends from the eastern edge of the Blackhawk Ranch development along Camino Tassajara, east and then south to the Alameda County' line. The valley has been under pressure to develop, fueled in part by some ranchers' Bob Walker Page 8 of''8 desire to liquefy some of their assets anchor retire from sometimes unprofitable operations. $5,000,000 will be reserved for acquiring properties either in fee simple or their development rights in order to preserve the open character of the valley and to provide opportunities for continuing ranchoperations.' It is anticipated that maximizing, permanent open space will be best achieved by acquisitions along hillsides and ridgelines, however, properties along Camino Tassajara and other roadways will be considered when cost-effective opportunities present themselves. H. LAS TRAMPAS'OPEN SPACE CONNECTIONS Extending from the Lafayette/Walnut Creek boundary south to the Alameda County line this prominent ridgeline parallels the scenic 1-680 and frames the western boundary of San Ramon, Danville, Alamo and the southern borders of oraga and. Walnut Creek. The area extends to the edge of St. Mary's College. The EBRPD's Las Trarrmpas''Wilderness area is located within this sub-region. Land conservation efforts need to be extended to the 'north and south to better protect this prominent physical feature. $5,000,000 is set aside for either agricultural easements or fee simple acquisition. 1. KIRKER')=TILLS Y3: 3i, This ranching area frames the northern flank of the Cities of Concord and Clayton and reaches northerly to the City of Pittsburg. Immediately to the east is Black Diamond Mines Regio- nal Preserve. The purchase of agricultural easements to protect this area into the future as ranching lands will Bob Walker Protect this area from future sprawl and large lot development. In some cases the land may be acquired for addition to Black Diamond Mines Regional Preserve. $5,000,000 is set aside to purchase lands or easement in this area. Page 9 of 9 EAST COI1NTY''FO0MLLS Bob Walker This large area extends from the southern end of _Antioch and the western boundary of Brentwood south to the Byron Airport.` This grassland and oak savannah area is the home to many endangered species. As the heart of the remaining grazing lands in the Conray, this area needs to be protected for both agricultural production and habitat preservation. Public ownership of conservation easements will insure this area will remain 'a viable' corridor for wildlife; $5,000,000 is;set aside for this effort. K. CREEK AND WATERSHED'RESTORATION PROGRAM This funding category will provide seed money for creek and watershed projects located throughout the County. Specific ob'ectives include: .. Restoration of the natural character and function of creeks. ❖ Transformation of creeks into community amenities through enhancement of visual character and improved public access. �.• Watershed restoration, including weed management,' water duality enhancements, and improved permeability to restore natural groundwater recharge and minimize'flooding. The $5,000,000' set aside for this flagship will be divided geographically roughly as follows--One million dollars each for five geographic areas, which are: Patricia Mathews Page`10 of 10 Q West County watersheds from Crockett to the Alameda County line. ° East County watersheds from Bay Point to Oakley and Brentwood. ° North and Central County watersheds, including':. Alhambra Creek, Grayson Creek, Mt. Diablo Creek, and Walnut Creek from the°City of Walnut Creek north to the Bay. South and Central County watersheds including the Lamorinda area and the lands south of Walnut Creek to the Alameda County line. ° The final one million should be reserved for the rural, less-impacted portions of each of these watersheds. Project nomination for grants will be submitted through the Contra Costa Watershed Forum and will be prioritized for funding by a six member committee representing one member each from the Contra Costa Flood Control District, the Contra Costa Community Development Department,` the Contra Costa' Clean Water Program, Contra Costa Resource Conservation District, the Contra Costa/Alameda Weed Management Area and a representative from;a countywide creek advocacy organization appointed"by the other five members. Grant allocations in any fiscal'year shall not exceed$500,000. L. TRAIL CONSTRUCTION AND ENHANCEMENT PROGRAM This shall provide funding for the construction of trails, acquisition of right-of- way for trails and for enhancements along existing trails. $5,000,000 will be established for off-road (Class 1) trails. This will be based on competitive grants to be reviewed annually and projects that attract matching funds should be encouraged and recognized in the decision making process. Funding of facilities shall be reviewed annually and shall be dispersed with a $500,000 per year maximum. Priority will be given to funding ,projects to provide sub-regional or regional connectivity, that is trails connecting communities, or regional parks or major city parks together. Allocations shall be made by the Allocation Advisory Committee. PV. DESCRIPTIONS OF REGIONAL PRIORITIES & ALLO- CATION PROCESS The Regional Priorities category is to be funded for$27,200,000. This category includes numerous very worthy recreation and Open Space funding projects that are important to geographic,: sub-regional areas of the County for which there are insufficient local resources to accomplish the project. Page 11 of 1'1 These projects will require matching funds of at least orae-to-one, though 'funding measure revenues can be used as the local match for other programs that require local match: Most of the funds in this category will be allocated by the Advisory Committee upon receipt of nominations: The identified projects and their maximum funding levels are described below: 1} West Moraga/lndian Valley Open Space Acquisition ($2M) This will expand the publicly protected lands adjacent to the San Leandro Reservoir Watershed and provide for public parklands connectivity to Sibley Regional Park. 2) Burton Ridge in the Lafayette/Walnut Creek Area Open Space Acquisition($2M) Burton Ridge parallels the western boundary of Rossmoor`and these rugged lands could be added to the embryonic open space system found in the area. 3) El Sobrante Foothills Open Space Acquisition ($2M) The rugged hillsides that frame this community have several opportunities for acquisition. This will provide seed money to protect the rugged and slide' prone hillsides and contribute to completion of the Bay Area Ridge Trail. 4) Big Break Open Space Park System ($2M) Funds from this measure could be used to develop local park amenities near the Dutch Slough Slough Restoration and/or fund the construction of a major educational and scientific institution on the Delta Shoreline, the Delta Science Center. 5) Old River Delta Shoreline Park Acquisition and Development near Discovery Bay($2M) The western Delta is rich in recreational potential but there is a lack of public recreational facilities in this part of the County; this would fund a shoreline parka 6) John Marsh Dome Pioneer Park Development near Brentwood($2M) The John Marsh Home is the oldest home in the County and the funding would be utilized for improvements to the historic facility and to enhance the surrounding public property. 7) San Francisco Bay Shoreline Hills Urban Open Space& Creeks (El Cerrito area) ($2M) Page 12 of 1 This highly urbanized area of the County near the Alameda County line presents a wide variety of opportunities for new parks and open space, including wetland restoration on the shoreline,creekrestoration and associated pocket parks through the lowlands, and hillside protection opportunities in the hills. 8) Walnut Creek Watershed Enhancement Project($2M) This would provide:local agencies funding for projects that enhance this creek system from San Ramon and Lafayette to Suisun Bay. Benefits would include implementation of the 1992 restoration plans for the Walnut Creek Channel and spin-off benefits to the Iron Horse Trail. 9) ` Concord Naval Weapons Station Habitat Restoration and Wetlands Access($2M) Funds would support restoration of habitat and public access to wetland areas in this moth-balled' military facility, consistent with interim use plan now being formulated. 10) Lindsay Wildlife'Museum Off-Site Wildlife Rehabilitation Center($'1.2M) The Lindsay Wildlife Museum needs a rural facility to care for larger'species of rehabilitated wildlife and prepare them for re-introduction to the wild. 11) Byron Airport/Habitat Corridor($2M) This is to acquire lands between the Byron Airport and the Los Vaqueros Reservior to the fragmented habitat lands together. 12) Bishop Ranch Bib Canyon Park Expansion($1M): This is to provide parkland expansion that will tie parkland in southwest San Ramon into a cohesive unit.' 13) Blackhawk/lanville Greenbelt ($1M), This:provides funding to secure the existing boundary between planned growth" areas and the rural Tassajara Valley Flagship area. 14)' Northwest Communities Open Space Connection($1 M) This provides funding to tie together open space and parklands between Hercules, Rodeo and Crockett. 15) Pittsburg/Antioch Hillsides ($1M). Page 13 of 13 This provides funding to tie existing park and dedicated open space lands together into a cohesive system along tate southern edges of Pittsburg and Antioch. 16) Wildcat Creek Trail Extension($2M) This will Delp fund completion of the Wildcat Creek Trail from the Bay Trail in North Richmond through San'Pablo'to Alvarado Park at the foot of the hills. The trail may not be able to follow the creek in all segments due to right-of-way constraints, and alternative alignments that may be necessary in some places are also eligible for funding. Other funds will be allocated based upon grant requests to the"Advisory Committee. All requests for funding of regional Priority Projects will need to identify the agency that will implement and operate the facility, ensure that the property will be protected in perpetuity and identify the anticipated'source of matching funds. Non-profit groups could satisfy match requirements by developing an endowment fund to assure operation and maintenance. V.�SCRION_ fly' ;COMMUNITY PRIORITY ALLOCA- TIONS Due to theextensiveunmet funding for local park, recreation, trail, open space, and historic preservation purposes, this funding measure will provide twenty-one (21) percent of the funds as a pass through to local governmental agencies that provide park and recreation services. An allocation of $27,720,000, or approximately $28 per County resident, is recommended for this purpose. Some additional features of this:allocation are described below: o Eligible projects include: park acquisition and development, park structures, open space areas, trails, restoration of creeks and other natural resources, recreational' facilities, and park renovations. Operation and maintenance costs are ineligible. All cities, park and recreation districts, county service areas or other local governmental agencies are eligible to receive funding if they are authorized and provide parks and recreation services to a community or area. ° That cities get credit for all'. population within the city; if thereis a..unit of government that provides services to the unincorporated area within the city SOL the funds would go to that local entity In cases of overlap- the funds go to the city. All remaining funding for the unincorporated areas will be allocated by the Board of Supervisors as they deem.appropriate: Page 14 of 1'4 ° Five percent of the $27,720,000 allocated:for the Community Priorities category ($1,300,000} will be reserved for projects that involve more than one public agency. This Partnership Incentive will be allocated by a competitive grants process established by the Advisory Committee. The Cooperation Bonus may not fund more than 20% of the cost of a project. o Community Priority funds shall be reimbursed after the project is completed. The exception is that up to 15%of the grant amount can be requested for the up-front design and permit costs. 15% is the cap for reimbursement of design and permit costs.The'Open Space Funds Allocation Advisory Committee will consider requests for upfront appropriations. 0 Funding to:identified agencies will be provided after receipt of an action by the elected body of each agency specifying the proposed use of the funds and describing how the project conforms to the purposes of this benefit assessment district. For the 85% or'more`of funds to be paid on a reimbursement basis, documentation of the completed project is also required: o The Advisory Committee would develop more detailed procedures for disbursement of funds within the first year of operation Applying the above criteria to the 2000 Federal Census Figures, the Community priority allocations will be as described in the table in Attachment A. Vl. (OPEN SPACE STE A:RDSMP Stewardship of protected lands and resources is an essential complement to protection of all farms of open space in Contra Costa County. All projects awarded funds from this measure would be required to prepare a stewardship plan and to demonstrate a source of funds to operate and maintain lands and resources. However, if stewardship expenses are compatible with the funding mechanism that is ultimately selected, reserving a portion of new funds for stewardship is recommended. The amount reserved for stewardship may vary by funding category and may vary over the life of the measure. There is a cumulative cap on stewardship expenditures within each category of 10%, but no cap on stewardship expenditures within individual projects. Funds for Community Priority projects should not be spent on stewardship. (The Ad Hoc Committee has requested further research on specific stewardship needs. That research, together with any information on voter preferences! may factor` into 'a subsequent recommendation on the ultimate magnitude of the cap on stewardship:) Inclusion of stewardship funding would complement acquisition of conservation easements. Stewardship'funds,could be deposited in an annuity or other interest'earning endowment account to support''easement stewardship in perpetuity. Such an approach is attractive because it would address the costs of open space conservation in a comprehensive matter. Page 15 of 1'5 VII. DE CRIPTI N OF THE OPPORTUNITY RESERVE FUND An Opportunity Reserve Fund of $8,300,000 will be createdand held for projects of flagship or regional priority level that aren't presently advocated or are subsequently determined to be under-funded'. Not less than $2 million'of these funds shall be reserved for flagship level projects. VIIL PROGRAM ADMINISTRATION A. Open Space Funding Measure 1. Appointment of committee The funding and oversight of this funding measure will be the responsibility of the Open Space Funds'Allocation Advisory Committee (hereafter called the "Advisory Committee). The Board of Supervisors' shall appoint the members of this 15-member committee to two-year terms. Seats on the Committee shall be dedicated to representing specific interests and constituencies. To strengthen the connection between members and their representatives, a nomination process will be used that assigns responsibility for 'committee nominations to a variety of organizations Criteria for selection of nominees will be up to the nominating organization, but all members must reside within Contra Costa County and within the area served by the nominating authority. The committee:shall be composed of members representing the following interests and nominated by the following organizations: Representing Nominating Bodo Cities (2 reps.) Mayor's Conference EBRPD EBRPD Berard of Directors Supervisorial District 1 District 1 Supervisor Supervisorial District 2 District 2 Supervisor' Supervisorial District 3 District 3 Supervisor Supervisorial District 4 District 4 Supervisor Supervisorial District 5 District 5 Supervisor Land Trusts Board of Supervisors' Business Interests Ranching&Farming Interests'(2 reps.) Environmental Organizations'(2 reps) Government finance watchdog org „ Labor Representative Social justice/equity representative Page 16 of 1'6 *The Board of Supervisorswill select the appropriate organization to nominate the land trust, business interests, ranching and farming interests, environmental organizations, and: the government finance watchdog organization, and those organizations will make the actual nomination of committee members for those seats. Appointments becomeofficial after the Board of Supervisors confirms nominations and the appointee's Conflict of Interest statement is received' by the Clerk of the Board of Supervisors. 2. Operation of Advisory Committee This will be a Brown Act and Better Government Ordinance Committee and all meetings of the full committee shall be open to the public and shall be located within the County. Committee members shall not be-paid'to serve. 3. Responsibilities of the Committee a. To guide the administration of the funding measure consistent with the funding principles described above. b. To determine which agency or agencies will receive funds to implement flagship projects, regional priorities, and opportunity reserve funds. c. To determine the priorities for the expenditure of funds (i.e., to allocate funds equitably and logically over time, whether this involve allocation of annual tax and assessment revenues or the selling and refunding of any revenue bonds). d. To determine the appropriate amount and increments of bonds to be sold, if any; to balance funding needs, interest rate opportunities and the flow of bond repayment revenues, e. To determine that matching funding will be available for the regional' priorities' projects(which require a one-to-one match or better). L To ensure that matching funds stretch the use of band funds. All bond funds"should be considered local match against funding programs. g. Determine the rale of conservation easements in the acquisition priorities. h. To allocate funds for trail'and watershed projects as described. i. To balance competing demands'for funding geographically. Page 17 of`17 j. Allocate the Partnership Incentive within the community priority funds.` k. To reallocate unused funds within each category if excess funds are available or if projects can't be completed. Reallocated funds shall remain in the geographic area from which they originated. 1. To conduct an annual review of funded projects and to oversee the preparation of an annual report by staff. m. Conduct other actions necessary to implement the funding measure measure 4. Role of the Contra Costa County Board of Supervisors The Board will be responsible for the administration of the funding measure and on the use of County staff to ensure that the funding proceeds are spent expeditiously. The Open Space Advisory Committee shall provide policy advice and guidance to the funding program, but the Board of Supervisors shall have ultimate decision-making authority. The Board shall receive an annual report that outlines the work accomplished over the last fiscal year and a program for anticipated expenditures for the next three fiscal years. 4. Administration Services Administration services for the committee shall be County staff and shall be 'funded from funding measure proceeds, these costs shall not exceed three(3)percent of total revenues. 5. Sunset of Advisory Committee Once 95% of the funds are allocated the Committee will sunset and the Board of Supervisors shall take over the role of the Advisory Committee. IX. FUL4DING MEM-ANIS A Benefit Assessment District'approach is the recommended method for implementing this program. Assessment .Districts place a charge on real property to pay for the special benefit conveyed to that property from a government service. The amount assessed is determined by an engineer's report that distributes the cost of the government service according to benefit received ;by each property. Assessments must be approved by a weighted majority of property owners in an election conducted by mail. Votes are weighted according to the amount of assessment that would be paid: Page 18 of 1'8 This approach has been used recently by the Santa Clara County Open Space Authority and the Mountains Recreation l and Conservation Authority (a government' agency with the mission of acquiring land' in the Santa Monica Mountains). After considering a comprehensive evaluation of available mechanisms developed by staff"several years agcy, and .after considering several of these mechanisms in significant detail, the Advisory Committee concluded that the Assessment District Approach was the best match for the Open Space Funding Measure, Attachment B presents a more detailed description of the evaluation process and the alternatives considered: r Yi y: a3 i. W Page'19 of 19 Attachment A: Community Priorities Allocations JURISDICTION 2000'<POPULATION FUNDING Antioch 90,532 $2,512,700 Brentwood 23,302 $646,800 Clayton 10,762 $298,700 Concord 121,780 $3,380,000 Danville 41,715 $1,157,800 El Cerrito 23,171 $643,200 Hercules 19,488 $540,900 Lafayette 23,908 $663,600 Martinez 35,866 $995,500 Mora a 161290 $452,200 Oakley' 25,610 $711,100 4rinda 171599 $488,500 Pinole. 19,039 $528,500 Pittsbu!2 56,769 $1,575,70 Pleasant Hill 32,837 $911,400 Richmond 99,216 $2,753,800 Ban Pablo 30,215 ;$838,700 San Ramona 44,722 $1,241,300 Walnut Creek 64,296 $1,784,600 UNINCORPORATED COUNTY COUNTY SERVICE AREAS CSA R-7A Alamo 15,626 $433,700 CSA. M-16 Clyde 694 $19,300 CSA P 1 R-1 Crockett „3,194 $88,700 CSA M-8 Discovery Bay 8,981 $249,300 CSA R-9 El Sobrante 12,260 $340,300 LSA M-17 Montarabay 10,336 $286,900 CSA R-10 Rodeo 8,717 $242,000 AUTONOMOUS DISTRICTS Ambrose'P&Rd (Bay Point) 21,534 $597,700 Diablo GSD 988 $27,500 Kensington CSD 4,936 $137,000 Pleasant Mill P&Rd 4,682 $130,000 Rollin ooa/W llara P&RD2,900 $80,500 REMAINDER OF UNINCORPORATED 56,842 $1,577,100 UNINCORPORATED COUNTY SUBTOTAL 151,690 $4,210,100 Partnership Incentive 1 $1,386,000 GRAND TOTAL 948,816 $27,720,1180 Page'20 of 20' Attachment B Notification List for Centra Costa County Advisory Committee on Open Spate Funding City of Antioch Leisure Services City of Antioch _ Contra Costa County Farm Bureau a�� sieveAbbors East Bay Municipal Utility District lCh�_ Abrams City of Walnut Creek Seth .Adams Save Mount Diablo Jared Aldrich Canyon Community Association Karen Alley Town of Moraga Brock T. Amer City of San Pablo Carol Arnold Friends of Pinole Creek Marianne Aude Mitch Avalon CCC Public Works Dept. Gil Azevedo City of Antioch Parks& Recreation Commission Stephen Barbata Delta Science Center at Big Break Dennis Barry,AICD GCC Community Development Dept.^ Christina Batt Muir Heritage Land Trost Yvonne Bayless C.Y.C.L.E. Bob Berggren Ci"!Pleasant Hill Park& Recreation Commission LindaBest Contra Costa Economic Partnership Bruce Beyaert Trails for Richmond Action Committee(TRAC) BethallynBlack'Rogers UC Cooperative Extension Jim Blickenstaff Sierra Club, Mt.Diablo Group, Rosie Bock East Regional Park District Gloria Boehm City of EI Cerrito Laszlo Bonny Town of Moraga,Parks ,Recreation Commission Jack Bontemps Odnda Parks& Recreation Foundation Arthur Bonweil Save Mount Diablo Dubravka"Dee" Boskovic Rich Bottarini City,of Pleasant Hill Josh Bradt Urban Creeks Council Myrde Braxton City of Richmond Parks& RecreationCommission Kate Breslin Supervisor John Gioia's Office(District 1) Craig Bronzan City of Brentwood Parks&Recreation Ran Brown Save Mount Diablo Lanny Brown City of Brentwood Parks&Recreation Commission Sherida Bush City of Martinez Parks&Recreation Commission Joe Calabrigo Town of Danville Rosemary Cameron East Bay Regional Park District Bob Cantrell City of Martinez Parks&Recreation Charles Carpenter Willis Casey City of Pittsburg. Maria Catanzaro Page 21 of 21 t Dan Cather City of Walnut Creek Bob Chapman Terrence Cheung Supervisor Gioia's Office Paul Choisser Dave Collins East Bay Regional ParkDistrict Tom Conrad Ron Cornman Jason Crapo County Administrator's Office Dennis Cunnane Jim Cutler Planning,Mediation&Environmental Srvcs. Lori Dair Sustainable El Cerrito Mike Daley Sierra Club Bay Chapter John Dalrymple central Labor Council Brenda De La Ossa` Supervisor Donna Gerber's Office David Dolberg _ Trans for Richmond Action Committee(TRAC) Tim Donahue Sierra Club, Delta Group Dave Dowswell City of Pinole Bob Doyle East Bay Regional Parr District Lydia .Du Burg City of Concord Tad Duffy City of an Ramon Kathy Duncan City,of San Pablo Parks& Recreation Jeff Edmonston Lucretia Edwards Juliet Ellis Urban Habitat Program' Kevin Emigh CCC Public Works Dept Jeff Eorio City of San Ramon Parks& Recreation Betty&Sue Ericsson Craig Ewing City of Lafayette Steven Falk City of Lafayette Arthur Feinstein Golden Gate Audubon Society Peter Felsenfeld Centra Costa Times Larry Ferri Mt. Diablo State Park UV neFettig Saranap Homeowners`Association Paul Flores City of Pittsburg Susan ` Friedman San Ramon General Plan Task Force Kevin Gailey Town of Danville Jeff Gault City of San Ramon Donna Gerber CCC Board of Supervisors Ginger Gessner City of Concord Jahn Gioia' CCC Board of Supervisors Diana Granados Native Bird Connections Jeremy Graves City of Clayton Sean jGriffith West Contra Costa Green Party Marc lGrilsham City of Pinole Page 22 of 22 rDarla Guenzler Bay Area Open Space Council Jim Gwerder CCC Citizens Land Alliance Tom Hagler (Alexander Hall it of Hercules Parks& Recreation Barry Hand City of Oakley Scott Hanin City of EI Cerrito Pamela Hardy Ponderosa Horses Sharon Harris Cynthia _ Harvey Supervisor John Gioia's Office ;Sus _ Heckly Lindsay Wildlife Museum Judith _ Henderson Community Youth Council for Leadership&Education Melanie Hobden City of Orinda Kathy Hoffman Congressman George Mi##er`s Office Ralph Hoffman League of Women Voters Rebecca Ines C#ty of Pittsburg Community Development Michelle t Itagaki City of Hercules' Jim Jakel Contra Costa Council Jim JakelClty of Martinez Ed James City of Concord Vincent Johnson Community Youth Council for Leadership&Education Jody Jones Nancy Kaiser City of Oakley Steve Kirby Friends of Franklin Canyon Werner Koellner � Sierra Club,Mount Diablo Group John Kopchik CCC Community development Dept. Monica Kortz City of EI Cerrito Parks&Recreation Catherine Kutsuris CCC Community Development De t. Norman La Force Sierra Club SF Bay Chapter Debbi Landshoff Sierra Club,West Contra Costa Group Beverly Lane East Bay'Re iorzal Park District Steve Lawton City of Hercules Mike Leana,AICP City of Brentwood William Lindsay City of Orinda Beatrice Liu County Counsel's Office,Contra Costa County Laura Lockwood CCC Administrator's Office Karl Malamud-Roam Contra.Costa Mosquito'&Vector Control District S#Ivano Marchesi Contra Costs:County Counsel's Office John Markley _ City of Orinda Parks&Recreation Commission Kristine Mazzei Tri-Valley Business Council Barron Mccoy C#ty of San Pablo Quintin McMahon Town of Moraga Parks'&Recreation Commission Donna Menge John Mercurio Concord Parks and Recreation Commission Paul Merrick East Bay'LreacJu Conservation Etl Meyer jCCC Department of Agriculture Page 23 of 23 Darrell Mortensen City of Walnut Greek Parks&Recreation i MelissaMorten CCC Public Works Department Sandy Myers Town of Danville leisure Services iKathleen Nimr Sierra Club, Mt.Diablo Group Pat O'Brien East Bay Regional Park District ,Marcus O'Connell league of Women Voters IMichael Oliver City of Oakley Ed d Orozco_ City of Pittsburg'Parks&Recreation Commission lMitch Oshinsky .City of Brentwood Steve Pardieck Muir Heritage land Trust Mike Parness City of Walnut Creek Dianne Paul'' Canyon Comm unityAssociat'on Frank Pereira CCC Fish and Wildlife Committee Bernadette Powell Lindsay Wildlife Museum E jBob Power Bay Area Ridge Trail Council Edward Prenot, CC Master Gardener Ted Radke East Bay Regional Park District Mike Ramsey City of Pleasant Hill Jim Randall City of San Ramon W inston Rhodes City of Brentwood Nancy Richardson Town of Moraga Parks'&Recreation Kevin Roberts City of Walnut Greek Mary Rocha Patrick Roche CCC Community C}evetopmerit Capt. Richard Rollins Affiliated Engineers, Inc. Pam Romo Friends of the Creeks Carol Rowley City of San Ramon Parks& Recreation Commission Jennifer Russell City of Lafayette Parks i&Recreation Mike Sakarnoto City of Hercules Lori Salamack Town of Moraga Ruth Sayre Springhill Valit y,Homeowners'Association David Schmidt County Counsel's©ffice,Contra Costa County Lou Schretel City,of Walnut Creek Parks&'Rec.Commissort Mary Selkirk California Center for Public Dispute Resolution Cece Sellren Muir Heritage Land Trust Michael G. Sailors National Audubon Society Dan Shaw City of Richmond Community DLvjIopment,,DepaLment Nassir Shirazi City of Pittsburg' Maurice Shiu' CCC Public Works Dept. Diana Silver CCC Coundy Counsel's Office Jean Sid East Bay Regional Park District Igor Skaredoff Friends of Alhambra Creek Todd V. Skinner City of 2!Inda Parks&Recreation ,John Slaymaker Greenbelt Alliance Katherine Small City of Lafayette Parks&Recreation`Commission Marcia Somers ITown of Danville Leisure Services Page 24 of 24 Sandy Sprowl Tohn Steere Sycamore Associates r Karen Stein': Town of Moraga John .Stevenson City of Brentwood Bruce Stewart Community Youth Council for Leadership& Education Jackie Stewart iEvelyn Stivers Greenbelt Alliance BethStone East Bay'Regional Park District Joel Summerhill City of Pittsburg Darrel Sweet California.Rangeland Trust Bette Tarr TRAC Laura Thompson Association of Bay Area Governments Richard; Thompson CCC Ag Trust(staff) L=aura hompson SF Bay Trail Program,Assoc.of Bay Area Governments Clifford Tong Burton Valley.com Isiah Turner City of Richmond Gui van Domselaar City of Hercules Gerard Van Steyn Shilts Consultants, Inc.; Barbara Vaughn Mt. Diablo Audubon Society Barbara Vincent League of Women Voters Mike Vukeiich Contra Costa County Farm Bureau Karen Wahl City ofBrentwood Dave Walters Mimi _ Waiuch EBRPD Ron Ward City,of Antioch Jesse Washington City of Richmond marks&Recreation Hermann W elm Contra Costa Economic Partnership Nancy Wenninger East Bay Regional Park District Sharon West City of Richmond, Parrs Dave Wetmore City of Antioch Chris Wilcox City of EI.Cerrito Parks&Recreation Commission Barry Williams City of Richmond, Recreation&Parka Department Tim Wirth Trust for;Public Land Gene Wolfe Phil Wong City of San Ramon John .Woodbury Bay Area Open Space Council Jim ZeiirSski Page 25 of 25 Attachment C: AdditionalBackground Information on Funding Mechanisms The Advisory Committee'conducted a"thorough review of potential funding'mechanisms in the course of developing its recommendations, referring this subject to a subcommittee for more detailed discussion at several junctures. The Advisory Committee's evaluation process initially focused on a comprehensive summary of all available mechanisms for raising' local 'public funds for open space protection, a report 'prepared by",staff for the Board of Supervisors in '11999 (Options for Funding the Acquisition and Protection of Ooen Space and Agricultural Lands in Contra Costa County). Based on a review of this report and a series of discussions with invited experts on the emerging approach of using a Benefit Assessment District for regional open space protection, the Advisory Committee identified the following as the three most feasible alternatives: ° General Obligation Bond: The sale of bonds bucked by the full faith and credit of the issuing', agency and repaid through a temporary increase in the ad valorem' property tax. The size' of the tax increase is 'determined by the amount of bored revenues desired, the term for repaying the bonds, and the interest rates available in the bond market. ° Parcel Tax: A tax on real'. property. The tax maybe levied on a flat, per parcel rate, or may be graduated according to the use of the property (i.e commercial properties may pay one rate and residential properties may pay another) or according to other criteria. The tax cannot be levied on an ad valorem basis. If tax revenues are to be dedicated to a specific purpose, the parcel tax is defined as a Special Tax and requires the approval of 2/3::of the voters in a special election(same is true for general obligation bored). ° Benefit Assessment District: An assessment (i.e., a charge) on real property to pay for the special benefit conveyed to that, property from a government service. The amount assessed is determined by an engineer's report that distributes the cost of the government service according to benefit'received by each. Assessments must be approved'>>by a weighted majority of property' owners in an election conducted by mail. Votes are weighted according to the amount of assessment'that would be paid'. The table below compares the features of these three alternative funding approaches. General Obligation Parcel Tax Benefit Assessment Bond District How are funds Increase in ad valorem Tax on individual Assessment on generated? tax on property parcels. Possible for property. Amount tax to be a flat,per- assessed is parcel charge or to determined by vary tax by type of engineers report that parcel and ether distributes costs factors, J according to benefits. =- Page 26 of 26 GeneralObligation Parcel Tax Benefit Assessment Bond District Who pays? Property owners. Property owners; Property owners, Properties with a Tax rates are based on engineers'' higher net assessed determined within the report that distributes value pay more. measure'by the costs according to framers. benefits. Who votes? Reqistered voters Registered voters Property owners What voting margin 2/3 majority 2/3 majority 50%weighted is required for majority(votes are approval? weighted according to amount of assess- ment they would pa What type of Special or General Special or General Election by mail election? Election Election What are the time Two elections per Two elections per Election may be constraints on the year,though odd;years year,though odd convened at any time.` election? are more expensive years are more 45 days must be expensive allowed'for return of ballots. Costs of election Depends on how many Depends on how Depends upon how items on ballot many items on ballot many parcels included. OK to fund No Yes Yes stewardship? ? Fixed term required? Yes No No Possible to expend No Yes Yes revenues on a pay- as-you-90 ayas- au o basis? Possible to sell Yes (required) Yes Yes bands? Advantages ° Simple ° Possible to 0 Perhaps more customize tax rate equity,in distri- ° Only way to raise ad ' bution of costs valorem tax ° Flexibility in use of revenues 0 Flexibility in use of ° Best interest rate revenues Election may occur at any time Disadvantages Not possible to ° Even year election 0 Application to manage funds on probably required county-wide open pay-as you-go space'needs''is an basin Flexibility in tax emerging rate structure can technique Page 27 of 27 General Obligation Parcel Tax Benefit Assessment Bond Distriet be paint of ° No stewardship controversy ° Even year election probably required ° New property ownersgenerally pay more Page 28 of 28 ............ ............. ......... .......................... 0 000 z 0 0 00 00 0080000 0 Z 0oao00 COO C14 (3) (0 to cli LO Lf) N 00 CO to m N m 0 r- U) 0 0 LO 0 0 — 0000000 00 00 0 0 0 0 CIJ 00 0 tl- CO 0 CO LO CIJ 00 OD LO C1 "t a) co !� 0 (0 C14 Il- r- P_ 0 0 r- co D 0056 gggg Z _ O) Rtf) ,qIt W (T)U) — ODCJt- - U) 'too 00 't cy) co ce) N cm Z0890000 00 808 R rh n Iq Ci Lt) Lp 1,�� CN!P,.� va,6%cm A N IN V) - - Ul) r- :) q CIL . . . . . LL C13 609� 6'%to (0 6-,44 .: K L, CM 6e), : C\1 — — LLNNNNCIINCV N CM — cq 64% 69 60 4fl tf1 6%{fl /fl to 44 tf3 V9, 696% 69F 61 611161}6p/6%6% C\j 44 CL as as 0 ca 0- od z ca 0- - E CO z > cu cu CL L>,c a (D 0 ca z 0 0 fa Ocs Cc Ca LL .> 4) CL ? C) > 0 C: 4) -0 4) ca D a: (u.) !��c r 8 "a CD 0 C: 0 0 a 0 C 0 Z CC 0 06 a) 0 w C A2 0. C C C 0 0 r_ (D 0 n O&OM 20- 0 cy C's a 0 t- 0 0 4)0 0 cr a) 0 0 0 E 5 b 00 0 — 0 0 5t Y.Z E 5 0 q:5 E 0 CC C-1 zo 0 te E -2 (-D . 2 d- > ca C.) o CU cts .2 ro 0 :L. 0 , c: 0 0 > a) W SO CO 0 0 75 0 c cn ca 0) co .0 .5 .0 0 E a. X CZW A) 0) cd (D cc q c: L> m ca r r (n U) CO D E w P :3 cu a cr > to cti 0 �5 a) .0 E a) (a 0 0 w (a 0 CO 0) to 0 076 CO 0 L. 0) D X < CC)Z3 0 0 1 _j 2 mo 0 8r- ii: CL ka- if co(f) 5 Q_ S 0 a (D le fn CL Cr 06 CO 0 0 0 0 CL a) c cc; 0 0 CL 0) a) C >,CO , CL w= = �O .0 a 0 0 (D 0 1: c c 0 0 CL c 0 -0 -P - > 0 = = -() c 'D CL (1) — le L(i) E2 0 ca r w M, au c 1 E 0 >, r- 0 ' am 0) Ir 1 0 0 - >tca rz cd 0 E 0 LL Ne a :8 r < mg, U) 0 CC Lim > VQ to LL 0 2: C CO C, C (D 0 01 ,0 (D 0 O:p 0 M _3 w M M Z CL 5 A IV cc IF A V� AiWt Z Im (031000000000G7 0 gggggggggg c;g 6 pOQv Z000000 00 0 C> (:Z C LL 0 0 to 0 to m to m In m _ih U_ I_ E co Ori LL M 2 CL cr- CL 'D (D 4V4,4 10 Ca Q ca C C .'a 0 C\1 6.0 0 0 CO C .0 cq cm w —75 N E Cr w ca A = a 0 3: cc _ 'D 7S In ID 2D (a 0 0 -,g CL— U (D :41 0- r- U_ �i E'm w m (a= La-Z"E G C7 > Ru wj 0 (D U- cu C2 1: 0 E C c cc wit I MO. to 0 0 CD U) .04L.wq*,,�15, (D ITO 0 T m a- CL z S2 LLj (D A q g4L' 0 *%L L If r= ID -0 0 U0 0 E s, 0 ( EnvD MOW (D (DM I M 0 q r. U. ir CL (D A ccc A- ®R .0 P TIN. :,g te (_D N ELL §C. 03 z 2 C.)z 0 C: C N Z C a, ad L (D cor x 0 HIM IMMM! 2 OL (a CL 0 0 B 0 CD 0 M is 0 %A E 0- 06to 0 0ro 0Cl 1� 2dy 1 1jiliji! M. 0 a. ! _(O 'a 0O Um CL 75 8 M, r L) 0 .IfC 1. (D .. ..... .... txr .0 c 119P HIM 1! 4) ro gliR !g� Xl . ....... CIJ 0 E V ID F May 17 20017 The heed for Funding to Acquire and Protect Warks, Open Space, and Farmland in Contra Costa County Prepared by: The Contra Costa County Advisory Committee on Open Space Funding ApioiA, .,Tnw of., v;,.nt, The value of open space: The variety of open spaces in Contra Costa County--from pristine Bay Ar(x"-, � ;; c v natural parks, scenic shorelines, and productive tracks of prime farmland to neighborhood parks, trails, and urban creeks--are a crucial'component of the,quality of life of local ; D residents. Collectively,these open space resources provide many benefits: Places for people to hike,bicycle,play, find solitude&otherwise enjoy the outdoors; 0E n ,r t ;n D,, • • Protection of the visual character,heritage, and beauty of the County; rt • Food production for local residents and the world; r„ w; MWA • Habitat for diverse range of plant and animal species; Dep ° . A physical setting and amenities which attract and retain businesses, jobs, a vibrant FicxX . :}, .....r. culture, and talented people; • Opportunities for children and adults to learn about and appreciate the County's human *A s.. #,.:r:.r and natural'history; F t .;r £ . Y +► A complement to sound land-use planning and to efforts to address traffic problems. l.,,.,,;.> Past accomplishments: County residents have a long and remarkable history of protecting their open space resources. A few examples of the milestones and accomplishments of this �. ._N,. open space tradition are highlighted below: + Acquisition of watershed lands around public reservoirs has protected our water and tens` of thousands of acres,beginning in the 1910s and 1920s and continuing to today; • Creation of Mount Diablo Mate Park in 1921(631 acres in 1921--19,010 acres today); Formation'ofthe East Bay Regional Park District approved by voters in 1934, during the Depression and before the completion of the Bay or Golden Gate Bridges, creating one of the first regional"park districts in the country; much of Contra'Costa Country joined the District in 1964&today EBRPD owns 41,000 acres in the County, Development of an exceptional network of regional bicycle and hiking trails;' • Passage of Measure AA in 1988, providing $225 million for substantial expansions of regional(EBRPD)and neighborhood'parks in Alameda and Contra Costa Counties,' • Restoration and protection of`.creeks'throughout the County, largely due to the work of community-based creek and watershed groups; • Direct citizen action in open' space acquisition'through the "successful emergence of several well-organized land trusts in the County. Present challenges:'The booming regional economy can foster'vibrant communities and create economic opportunity for County,residents. However, this economic growth must be complemented with continued protection of our many open space resources if our quality of life is to be maintained. At the very least, we should build on the strong history of open,` space protection in this County and continue to provide parks and trails and other open space resources to keep up with a growing population. But, if we wish to pass on to future generations a community that retains the attractions that drew us here, we need to identify triose characteristics of the County that we most wish to protect and enhance, whether these be defining natural features--like Mount Diablo, the shoreline of San Francisco Bay, the Carquinez Straits, and Delta, or the fertile farmland of East County--or backyard open space resources--like neighborhood parks, urban creeks, scenic ridgelines, and hiking and biking trails--that make our,developed and developing areas pleasant places to live and work. We also need to determine how''we can pay for these future open'space actions. Comparison of Urbanization Open Space,and Future O 3en Space FunIng Among Bay Area Counties Contra Costa Alameda Marin Napa San San Mateo Santa Clara Solano 'Sonoma Francisco Percent of land area that is 26.2%- 25.5% 11.7% 3.5% 81.2% 19.9% 16.70/0 8.6% 7.2% developed' Percent of land area available for development' 9.5% 7.5% 5.7% 2.3% 7.0% 1 7.7% 4.1% 6.3% 6.9% Acres of protected open .12 acres per .06 .70 .84 .01 .14 .10 26 .23 space per capita(Bay area personacres per; acres,per acres/ acres/ acres per acres per acres/ acres per avers a=14 acres# rson arson person rson "ersonperson person person person Secure future funding for" ideals ri�e.AA MeajumM on-going None NIA C.S.Dist.has Recently None yet %cent open aae3 sloes not city&grant- {status sante property tax p sp � p party yet (parks a tax&.bond, initiated a sales tax. include Preposition 12 and able portion as CCC); increment dept. but band is parcel tax and for open' other state/federal'sources-- spent,EBRPD Landfill provides for budget) nearly spent. an O.S. space and see below) portion 80% tipping fee to acquisitions County has District. a county spent,remain- provide parks dept.w/ County parks open space ing 20%alio- significant annual has firm district sated by p@!L* o.s.funding. I bud'et. I budget Need-for new local funding; Meeting'the challenge of protecting open space in the future will require money. The recent passage of the state water and;park bonds (Propositions 12 and 13) will provide some direct funding to local jurisdictions on a per capita basis, but substantial portions of the bond revenues will be set aside for competitive grants that require or encourage a local match. A new source of local funds is needed to leverage;such sources and to provide revenues adequate to meet future open space needs,. Some additional reasons we need new local funding,are provided below: • Measure AA was passed in 1988 and revenues from it are either spent or nearly spent; • City and neighborhood parks need capital as their Measure AA funds were spent first; • Open space funding can compensate land owners for past and on-going stewardship; • Private organizations like land trusts, creek restoration' and regional trail groups present opportunities for partnerships between the public and private.sectors; • New funding can complement and supplement the work of the EBRP17 and extend local support to new types of resources such as protection of farmland; What should be protected in the future? We have made an initial attempt at defining the primary open space creeds in the County, relying on the following category descriptions to explain the variety of open space actions that are needed: Cammunity character—Preserve defining features of our landscape such as important ridgelines and other scenic landforms, green buffers,connections between open space areas,and other unique landscape or community features; Cr eekslwater-shads—Protect'and restore urban and other creeks, watersheds, wetlands, and 'soil, and improve safety and flood plain management; ariniand Provide conservation easements, buffers, irrigation water or other protections for prune agricultural soils,rangeland,and unique agricultural features; Historic Rreservation 4 —mental�e ucation ,facilities-Including cultural/geological preservation; integration of human/natural history with school curricula; Ieewighborhood Parkleo &create neighborhood parks to improve quality of life in our existing communities and complement revitalization efforts; S' orrelines—Protect and restore the shorelines of the Bay and Delta; Tr~aiis/PuhIic A cess--Close gaps in major .Bay Area trails like the Bay Trail and Ridge Trail, unify and connect existing regional trail systems, improve existing trails, public access and equestrian access,and provide new facilities for disabled.persons; Wildli`e habitat,& corridors-Protect/enhance the habitat of unique;&valuable plants&animals. ' ABAG estimates from"Status and Trends 2000",based on data from 1995(ABAG Figures do not consider the County's 65/35 ordinance which would restrict urbanization of the County to 35%of the land area) '` GreenInfo Network, 1999 3 East Bay Regional Park District and Bay Area open Space Council' Passible next steps: The above discussion is intended only to explain the need for new local funding for a variety of open space purposes. To advance the dialogue and bring us closer to meeting open space needs in the County,we propose the initiation of a planning process to involve additional interested people and organizations, to fin-ther dune open space priorities, and to examine options for developing new local funds for open space. This planning process may. include the following: I Involve additional interegted organizations and individuals • invite each of the April 24th meeting participants to participate in developing open space and funding plans • undertake additional outreach to city governments,businesses,labor, landowners, and others 2. Develop an open silage action plan • further develop and refine open space priorities(form a subcommittee, open to anyone interested,to begin work on this topic) • develop estimates of the costs of achieving these goals • explore existing and potential new funding opportunities,with an emphasis an potential development of additional, local public funds(form a subcommittee,open to anyone interested, to begin work on this topic) • examine details related to the mechanics of creating new local funds, such as types of funding measures and oversight and expenditure of any new funds Our recommendations will be presented to'a subcommittee of the Beard of Supervisors comprised of Supervisors Donna Gerber and John Gioia. The subcommittee will consider a recommendation to the Board of Supervisors, who, in turn, will provide policy guidance on this matter. We plan to hold another Advisory Committee meeting on the evening of September 20. We wish to thank Supervisors Gerber and Gioia and the full Beard for this opportunity to provide input. We also wish to thank participants in the April 24 meeting for your interest in and consideration of hese issues. REQUEST TO SPEAK FOR (TME (3) MOUTE LEWT) MEASE;PMT LEGIRLY Complete fc m ana place it in e box near spencers' rostr ,rn before addressing the Board. Name: �"��� � �2 � Phone q2,5 j o3 l SS--1 Address- b`l�a 3;ZS'S City re Zip Code: 4S6 i am speaking for myself or organization: Tri i ick (name of rganixatioii) CHECK ONE: I wish to spew nn Agenda Item# Date'. My Comments will be general fID� agai�t 1 wish to spew can the subject of T'do not wish to speak on the suh j ecJt lout leave these cornnnents for the board to 4considetr: REQUEST TO S"' W FORM {TIME (3) M' UTE LtM'T ) PLEASE:PRM WOLY Complete this form plwe it ire it bc>x near the speakers' rust m before addressing the hoard. Name: Phone Addreu ity ... Zip Code. I am speaking for myself or organization: (name of arpnfraioti) CHECK U lz I wish to speak on..Agenda Item 4 Date'; 16 My Comments will be general for against I wish to speak on the subj t of I do not wish to speak on the subject but leave these'eornments for the boat to consider: REQUEST TO SPEAK'FORM ('TIME (3) MINMIE LIIWUT) PLEASE PRINTLEGIBLY Complete this form and placeit in the box near the speakers'rostrum before addressing the Board.' Nae: Address:3 s ` city V\ . Zip Code: I am speaking for myself or organization: . (name of organization) CHECK ONE: I wish to speak on,Agenda item Date. /0 — / � � My Comments will be general for against I wish to spew on tits subject of —!:do not wish to spew an the subject but leave these comments for the board to consider: REQUESTT91W FORM (TYME ( ) MPWM LIM T) PLEASE PRITNT LEGIBLY completez.ftis form and pace it in�e box near the spq�cers? rostrm before addressing ihe Buard. Phone ddss: " 5-0 , , _ Zip Code I wn spea ng for myself '"` or organization: (name of Organization) CHECK ONE. I wish to spear on Agenda Item:# Date: My Conunent4s will be general for against I wish to speak on Ihe subject of O " t yin not wish these cc,nunrets for the board to consider: :xapjsuo o � s a�aa asat aA �loq jpa�gns,agj uo 3pads'of gsrm jou op i jo joafqns oqj uo)ltods of gstm I lsu!r,.Sx€ �aua Iii suauuoD #utall iopuagv uo)pads of gsj,N�i"" :ANO V)aHD :uollvzjtm8jo xo" xoj:9uj4eods ure pan g 3 dc s aq x au xoq aq u� Y a�� usqduo 041UISS peaxo ' ��+ , WHOA XV3JS OJL,I.SW163H REQUEST TO SPEAK FORM (TI31tEE (3) MINUTE LIMIT) PLEASE PRINT LktOLY Complete this foan and;place It in the box near the speakers' rostrum before addressing the Board. Name: .3 4 pho>Ze ' j J Address; l 'i - City a w1 c '` Zip Code': 51 �>` I am speaking for myself or organization: (name of o ganitation) CHECK ONE: I wish to speak on Agenda Item# Date:' ' ' My Comments will be general 1-1 for against I wish to speak on the subject of I€ o not wish to spew on the subject but leave these comments for the beard a consider: �iS YX - Vie: '> Fy }