Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAboutMINUTES - 02042003 - D2 0: BOARD OF SUPERVISORSuont °` ,.•' FROM: MARK OeSAULNIER € Supervisor, District 4uosta DATE: January 28, 2002 � ���' `� ounty SUBJECT: Contra Costa Facture Fund SPECIFIC REQUEST(S)OR RECOMMENDATION(S)&BACKGROUND AND JUSTIFICAT€ON RECOMMENDED ACTION: 1. Subject to Board of Supervisor approval as a part of the County's FY 2003404 budget, APPROVE in concept the earmarking of annual Transient Occupancy Tax to be received from the Renaissance Suites Hotel in the County's Pleasant Dill BART Redevelopment Project Area for prevention programs serving children and families in Contra Costa County. 2. If funded in the FY 2003-04 County Budget, DIRECT the County Administrator to foes prevention efforts initially in the Monument Corridor area of the City of Concord. FINANCIAL IMPACT: 100% Transient Occupancy Tax. BACKGROUND: The County faces very difficult fiscal challenges during the ensuing several years. During times such as this, a broad array of County services to the public are subject to reduction or elimination. Discretionary programs are often at greatest risk. Given the gloomy outlook for County resources, it would make sense, from a strategic standpoint, to reserve a portion of our limited resources to invest in services that may reduce longer-terra service needs and financing requirements. Investing in prevention services is a strategy that counties are bard pressed to do because of the categorical nature of county funding constraints. The availability of new revenues—such CONTINUED ON ATTACHMENT: X YDS SIGNATOR € r' --- --.---- -------- -----------_- _ ECOtdENIXION OF COUNTY ADMINISTRATOR R`COMME ',om €O.0.�OF BOARD _ COMMITTEE _,.,:::Ar PROVE OTHER SI€s',iATURE�S y �x -------- ACTION OF B9< €3N Febmyxy 4, 2003 APPROVE AS RECOMMENDED X OTHER X t VOTE OF SUPERV9SORS I HEREBY CERTIFY THA'"THIS IS A TRUE XIAND CORRECT COPY OF N ACTION"TAKENNAN#<1 O S(ABSENT I ) AND ENTERED ON THE MINUTES OF THE BOAR€3 OF SUPERVISORS ON THE DATE AYES: NOES; SHOWN. ABSENT: ABSTAIN: ATTESTED Feb. y 4, 2003 CONTACT: t7ort�tl y S nso 335 1aG9 J(5H SWEET EN,CLERK OFTHE BOARD OF SUPERVISORS AND CC: HSS, COLIN a Y ADMINISTRATOR EHSID CAO BY a>, La, ) � DEPUTY Page 2 as those anticipated from the new Renaissance Suites hotel — provide an opportunity for a more strategic approach, The Monument Corridor in Concord is a high need area in terms of service demands and population demographics'. The concentration of needed services in this area is exceeded only by North Richmond and Bay Point, where limited prevention service programming currently exists. A recent report by the Transportation for Healthy Communities Collaborative (Executive Summary attached), Roadblocks to Health, found that Contra Costa County's disadvantaged neighborhoods had significant barriers to transportation. Among other things, the report found' that in the Monument Corridor neighborhood in Concord, residents suffer from 0% transit access to hospitals and only I% access to clinics, despite the presence of facilities nearby. It is contemplated that the initial investment of prevention Banding in the Monument Corridor will, over the longer term, attract added funding from the City of Concord, as well as community based organizations, other service organizations and private foundations. To that extent, the allocated resources may then be reallocated to other high priority service needs and programs that benefit needy families and children, and that promote the coordination of preservation services throughout the County. With the Board's favorable consideration of this item, the County Administrator will develop a specific program funding proposal for the Board's consideration in the near future. -AM ITEM D.2 February 4, 2003 The Board of Supervisors considered the recommendation to approve in concept the earmarking of annual Transient Occupancy Tax to be received from the Renaissance Suites Hotel in the County's Pleasant Hill BART Redevelopment Project Area for prevention programs serving children and families in Contra Costa County, focusing on prevention efforts initially in the Monument Corridor area of the City of Concord. Supervisor Mark OeSauhsier presented the report and recommendations. The Board then discussed the matter and the following issues were raised: * Supervisor Uilkema requested that this matter be discussed again during budget deliberations in the event the County's financial picture was in hardships. * Supervisor Mover wanted to add to the recommendations that the County doses not eliminate the other communities in need and discuss in the future a partnership with those communities. The Chair then invited those who wished to address the Board on this matter. The following persons presented testimony: Join Wolfe, Contra Costa Taxpayers Association., 600 Las Juntas Street, Martinez, Raul Rojas, Monument Community Partnership, 1341 Galaxy Way' ", Concord; Eartha Newsong, Social Justice Alliance of Interfaith Council, 20 Irwin Way#638, Orinda, Roland Me Katz,Public Employees Union Local#1,P.O. Box 222, Martinez, Joseph Partansky, 1406 Barbis Way,Concord. Supervisor DeSaulnier moved the staf'f's recommendations to include the requests from the Supervisors and asked when the final recommendations return to the Board in April or May, that the report also include definite guidelines regarding the Transient Occupancy Tax. The Board took the following action: L3 APPROVED in concept the earmarking of annual Transient Occupancy Tax to be received from the Renaissance Suites Hotel in the County's Pleasant Hill BART Redevelopment Project Area for prevention programs serving children and families in Conga Costa.County, u DIRECTED the County Administrator to focus prevention efforts initially in the Monument Corridor area of the City of Concord; Page 2 February 4, 2003 D.2 zi AGREED to return this matter to the Board of Supervisors in 4 months with a inal recommendation and consider the issues that the Board raised today in regards to possible partnership with ether connnunities in need. •f Fes'' w.x y �' � •: LL ? .� 4 u }.£ �',�+. ems: ✓ �„}F'.. �fh .� r }r. ,y' o rrr{5 rS. } rk £.. ", � e �{ �}:i'x• 4 ��f' ,£s�.�a: '#,. �'..4^ Yk .� e�' � 't" S •}" .'`'` ,� b Lvn`• f i��' r 'S•"'p' ": • t �-. f$h,{rf. r; frz �"' ty $✓ ; ff�.: t, �#fr 3.5h` y$ •'�s. ��/.� •fir. ✓ f,• : '•,`$•. Y ',; f 2 �•� f�n,.�, rf✓. � �., ��� ,+� {• ��hip �}+fY� :. v ''' r `V. '}'J,,..�` ' k v } :r V.� v 3�lv r�%/ f�Cv %'-r:l � •�•' —~ f 5x � F /✓ t ' t 2� w'�•�� � � � { :�t � � fes{ ff } { z Y tr rS Y _ ' •r� �2 R i,fit. �_fir`:..� � .€ � �3:.a. }(fi.'Y.$•-s .{ �%r �' ,.� ��.;f +.�•S•'6sE •� �,T rfff v r+a ytif { ?ur ,:f f Kr r ; :�'� �}}." ✓r rt r 'v'r..}� +cc' t h .�� �f ,y..+ {f�f::: ..� o a � $r ,.:- y<rw. •'y" �,�2 r;s ri..•• ` {: t +r* .r{vx } Y r'f •^::• Y i�.. :% {}. h• 1.4 � {•, •Y} { :f;:`:: 4r�-%� r � t'fti' 2 '" f 'J'rf 4 .f Y afj rf{ { '•Y 2 +Y{; } ,y.y x^'w^ ,' r t y l.: :_f $ t f"";ffi �''a•:'. ✓fr ,+.?J+a. ,.• rf�'^' f fir: �{f �?� ,r ..£•$Y.4 is { r�f G,rt 'f5'-i+:•' l�rf y a�/f' f ��#F �;•x' r frf •:: ! .x fr f• x' ff y r #. Y %� tf. .r ?•% •:.: .. „ F2-rr f , fi .. a:.vv .''' Xr f.. J fG i..V,.4.:.- • ry, r..: ''r 'SR�.�'. - �$�:. x, k ' .,r•.f ♦ •,;\ .} •. ., •. {. •:$• ..,...r ..: 2_n5 ,.,rr. r,,;x off.{r. ; .f{fa�uy�✓..... , ''£•{ ff'f"-'+i rt••• fff . {✓ aTet.�![a3kR.�uu ^$ }„r�''�#..r.H..+f f '••'. '3. . � fi 1-Y {•qx:{ 2%"✓r R ^' Y-ri ;'{' 'v Syr �`^�x�-,�-�.r fit'•K: t' � ^k•. >h? •- .k* 2afi" � r ' { ' y { {.}r....a .rf;;t,f,r .}<,:{ +✓•'r, •:;3'.0 f;Y b .I•',.u'^ - } � Yx{ \v'" a: {,�. v ✓ ✓ e ::.:. ..• ; ,.h:c4:}.: :: >.;;.:.. •.; '�. .c b'y{:y a.c t aat•: {, :},,.:k> ,£:•'�,} 5 +. y f � • - :v vii•, r. . fes' tY�F: - 3��, _ .{. '{ � ,''�s '� �G t •4'��{° '+tf-'�j Sir•."-e"•` : •af .��.,'y��,.iv% x e{..•:^+3:Uj�}2;. y3L'.., 4*,;sew :__§., :��: � �} $� w v :: k ,, •.•x'+ r-y:}hv 3 f b r}'"$?�"� r<> a Rt b f{ Roadblocks to Health: Transportation Barriers to Healthy Communities A Report by the Transportation for Healthy Communities Collaborative: Jeff Hobson, Policy Director Trar:sportation and Land Use Coalition (TALC) .)ulie Quiroz-Martinez, Associate Director Center for Third Word Organizing Carr}eron Yee, Policy Director People United for a Better Oakland (PUEBLO) With research guidance by: Rachel Moreilo-Erosch, Ph.D., M.P.H., Assistant Professor, Health Education Zoe Clayson, Sc.C., Associate Professor, Health Education San Francisco State University Written by: Jeff Hobson and Julie Quiroz-,l;art?nez Major Funding PraAded by: The California Endowment Additional copies of this report are available free of charge by downloading from TALC's website at www.transcoal;Uon.org, or for the cost of reprinting by contacting: Transportation and Land Use Coalition, 414 13t;< Street, 5th Floor, Oakland, CA 94612, phone: 510/740-3150, email: Infoctranscoalition.org, wwvv.transcoalitiorz.org<http://w�,vv.transcoalition.org/> Photos by TALC's Archive, guillermo Prado. Design by guillermo Prado at 8 point 2 design Copyright 0 TALC, 2002 ExEcU °IVE SUMMARY For peopie who own cars, it's fairly easy to get to a doctor, a grocery store that offers fresh fruits and vegetables, or a park where they can exercise. But in marry icw income communities of color, where residents depend or public transit and walking, poorly planned development and inadequate transit funding have put many of these basic services out of reach. As residents of these communitles know — and research has confirmed — in,adequate transportation is one of the primary reasons that low-income families miss, or forego scheduling, medical appointments. The problem is particularly acute with chronic and preventative care, and when children have to be transriorted as weft The myriad health problems of low-income people of color snake these transportation barriers nothing less than urgent. According to the U.S. Department of health and Human Services, there is "compeiling evidence that race avid ethnicity correlate with persistent, and often increasing, heaith disparities among U.S. popuiations." The situation is becoming even worse as the frenzied pace cif health care "consolidation" continues. Mergers are spawning the closure of facilities in areas that need it most, such as the planned ciosure of the San Jose Medical Center, in downtown in San Jose, or forcing cutbacks in services such as those anticipated from the proposed Summit/Alta Bates merger in Oakland. Ignoring this serious and far-reaching Situation, elected leaders are instead focusing new transportation investments or "congestion relief` that primarily benefits long-distance white-coliar commuters, leaving the needs of low-income co ,munities of Color unmet. Our collective failure to brig critical analysis and new voices to demand transportation iustice is hurting our communities while promoting an unhealthy and unsustainable dependence on automobiles. TRANSPORTATION FOR HEALTHY COMMUNITIES COLLABORATIVE TIT Roadblocks to Health is the product of a rerrarkab:e collaboration between social Justice community organizers and transportation advocates — a two-year project dedicated to making the health of low-income communities of color a top transportation priority. This project has been ,ed by the Transportation and Land Use Coalition (TALC), Center for Third World Organizing(CTWO), and People United for a Better Oakland (PUEBLO). Roadblocks to Heafth examines the trar:soortation barriers to health care, nutritious food, and physical activity for residents of fifteen low-income communities in Alamada, Contra Costa, and Santa Clara Counties. TALC conducted a Geographic information Systems (CIS) mapping analysis to identify the number of people in each neighborhood who have transit or pedestrian access to health care facilities and supermarkets. This represents the most detailed analysis of access to health care in the Bay Area, and the methodology represents an advance in the state-of-the-art for transit accessibility analyses. PUEBLO spearheaded a community survey of 600 residents in four languages, and CTWO provided critical racial justice analysis and overall project coordination. FINDINOS The mapping, survey, and research findings presented in this report clearly demonstrate that the Bay Area's most disadvantaged communities face significant transportation barriers to healthy activities. in low-income cor munities of color, where car-ownership rates are low, inadequate public transit limits access to hospitals, corer ,unity clinics, supdrim.arkets, and regional parks. People of color are disproportionately injured and killed on unsafe streets —a health crisis ir. itself that in turn contributes to fears of walking and bicycling. Access in each of these communities varies significantly, but none is adequately served. Some of the key findings include: Manmada County Only 28% of the residents of Alameda County's disadvantaged neighborhoods have transit access to a hospital, leaving over 160,00€3 .residents without tran- sit access. rg African-American pedestrians in Alameda County are 2.5 times more likely than white ;pedestrians to be hit by a car and killed or hospitalized. Contra Costa County m Contra Costa County's disadvantaged neighborhoods have the worst access of the three counties in this study: 20% of residents have transit access to a hospital, 00%o have transit access to a community clinic, and SO%a have walking access to a supermarket. >; in four of the county's six neighborhoods, no residents have transit access to a hospital. -.a In Vonurnent Corridor neighborhood in Concord, residents suffer from 0% transit access to hospitals and only 1% access to clinics, despite the presence of facilities nearby. North Richmcind residents have 0%6 access to hospitals and supermarkets. Bursa Clam County Of the three counties studied, Santa Clara County's disadvantaged neighbor- hoods residents have the best transit access to hospitals and supermarkets. Access to hospitals is threatened by the planned closure of the San Jose Medical Center, which would reduce transit access to;a hospital: from 42% to 0% for residents of downtown Sari Jose, and from 74% to 48% for residents of 'Wast San Jose. 2 Residents of suburban Gilroy suffer from. poor transit access under all :the measures in this report, including 0% access to clinics, 7% transit access to hospitals and 33% to supermarkets. RECOMMENDATIONS The findings of this report are disturbing, but there are investment and policy solutions that can tear down these barriers. Over the next three years there will be up to $ 6 billion in new transportation funding proposals in the Bay ,area, providing a once-in-a-generation opportunity to fund these solutions. This report offers us a new way of looking at transportation as a vital public health resource, and opens the doors to new forms of collaboration and coalition building. Some of the to priority recommendations include. 1. Meet basic transit needs of low-income carsrmun ties of color. First and foremost, we must begin by insuring that low-income communities of color have their basic transit needs met. The Metropolitan Transportation Commission recently identified a Lifeline Transit Network that would help meet many of the basic needs of low-income communities. This should be the top priority for funding, complemented by free transit passes for low-income families. . Make health access a top priority in transportation policy and planning. Leaders from the transportation and health care communities need innovative collaborations that elevate health access issues on the transportation agenda. Some policy initiatives include identifying community clinics — not just !hospitals — in the Lifeline Transit Network and requiring transit agencies to conduct a "Health Access impact Analysis" of proposed route cuts and expansions. To promote healthful activity, funding for pedestrian and bicycle safety projects and for transit service to regional parks should be significantly increased. 3. Make Medi-Cal transportation assistance available to all recipients. California should follow the example set in other states by expanding Non-Emergency Medical Transportation (N`MT) eligibility to include all people without access to a car — not lust people with physical disabilities — and allow funds .o be used for public transit. 4. Direct public resources towards disadvantaged neighborhoods, without dis- placing existing residents. We must reward cities that invest in transit-accessible services and facilities and expand programs, such as VITC's Housing Incentive Program, that support transit-oriented affordable housing in these communities. 5. Guard against reductions In transportation access to health camp. Access depends on location. W th a growing population, the health care industry should be opening new facilities, not closing or significantly reducing service at existing facilities that serve disadvantaged communities, We need to make 3 public transit access a key consideration in any decision to ciose or significantly reduce Service at a health case facility. Similarly, we must pian for high levels of transit access when considering the location of new facilities. 6, Support innovatIve efforts to ensure food security In these neighborhoods. Increasing access to heart^y food mast rely on a combina ion of efforts, including providing shopper shuttles to supermarkets, helping corner stores improve their food quality and operation, and reinvesting in inner-city sjpermarkets.