HomeMy WebLinkAboutRESOLUTIONS - 01011981 - 1981-212 In the Board of Supervisors
of
Contra Costa County, State of California
IN THE MATTER OF APPROVAL OF THE )
PRIORITY PLAN FOR EXPENDITURE ) RESOLUTION NO. 81(212
UNDER PROPOSITION I )
}
WHEREAS, The California Parklands Act of 1980 rewires that each county
shall consult with all cities and districts within the County which are eligible to receive
grant funds under provisions of Section 5096.156 of the Act and develop and submit to the
State for approval a Priority Plan for Expenditure of the county's allocation; and
WHEREAS, said Priority Plan shall reflect consideration of deficiencies within
the county in the preservation of historical resources and natural landscapes as well as in
the provision of recreational areas and facilities; and
WHEREAS, said Priority Plan shall also reflect regional park or open-space
needs as well as community and neighborhood park and recreation needs in any county in
which a regional park or open-space district is wholly or partially located; and
WHEREAS, the County of Contra Costa has consulted with said cities and
districts and has prepared a Priority Plan for Expenditure of the County's allocation which
reflects the deficiencies and needs required by the Program and includes expenditures by
eligible cities and districts, said Priority Plan being attached hereto and marked Exhibit
"A", and
WHEREAS, said Priority Plan has been approved by at least fifty percent
(50%) of the cities and districts representing fifty percent (50%) of the population of the
cities and districts within the County, said approval being shown on Exhibit "B", attached
hereto;
NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED that this Board of Supervisors does
hereby approve the Priority Plan for Expenditure of the County's allocation of funds under
the California Parklands Act of 1980; and
BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED that the Director of Planning is hereby author-
ized and directed to forward a certified copy of this resolution along with Exhibits "A"
and "B" to the State Department of Parks and Recreation.
Passed by unanimous vote of the Board on February 24, 1981.
CC: Director of Planning
Acting Director of Public Works CERnFIFD COPY
County Counsel x Certify that this is a full, true & correct copy of
County Administrator the original document which is on file in my office,
and that it was passed & adopted by the Board of
supervisors of Contra Costa County=. California, on
the date Shown, ATTEST: J. R. CLS ON, County
Clerk & cs-officio Clerk of said Board of Supervisors,
by Deputy Clerk.
RESOLUTION NO. 811212
EXHIBIT A
PRIORITY PLAN FOR EXPENDITURE
UNDER THE CALIFORNIA PARKLANDS ACT OF 1980
r
Approved by the
CONTRA COSTA COUNTY
BOARD OF SUPERVISORS
February 24, 1981
DEVELOPMENT OF THIS PRIORI T Y PLAN
On January 13, 1981, the Board of Supervisors requested the Director of Planningto
notify all eligible applicants of the. Board's intent to develop a Priority Plan for
Expenditure pursuant to the California Parklands Act of 1980.
The letter notifying eligible applicants of the Board's intent to establish such a plan,
invited each eligible agency to send a representative to a meeting to discuss the
allocation of local grant funds. Such a meeting was held on February 9th, 198.1. It was '
the consensus of the participating agencies that 20% of the County's allocation should be
reserved for use by the (oast Boy Regional Park District and that the remaining 80%
should be allocated generally on a per capita basis to eligible local agencies as discussed
according to the process identified later in this plan.
Based on that consensus view, this recommended priority plan is being forwarded to the
Board of Supervisors for authorization to distribute to eligible jurisdiction's for considera-
tion and ratification.
INTENT AND PROVISIONS OF THE BOND ACT
Proposition One, on the November 4, 1980 ballot, provides $285 million to purchase and
develop local, regional and state parklands. The bond program emphasizes parks in urban
areas, and will provide new recreation opportunities close to home for millions of
Californians.
The amount reserved for local government grants in Contra Costa County which are to be
allocated in this Priority Plan has been set by the State.at $2,289,155 based on 1980
population projections of the State Department of Finance.
The Band Act provides that each county shall submit a Priority Plan for Expenditure by
January 2, 1982. The Priority Plan must be approved by the Board of Supervisors and at
least 50 percent of the cities and recreational districts representing at least 50 percent of
the population of those cities and districts within the County. Given the need for use of
these monies as soon as possible, it is hoped this Priority Plan can be approved in time for
inclusion in the State 1981-82 budget.
After the Priority Plan has been accepted by the State, an application for a grant for each
specific project will be made to the State Department of Parks and Recreation by each
authorized jurisdiction. In order to be eligible for Band Act funding, each project must be
for $20,000 or more.
METHOD USED FOR DISTRIBUTION OF FUNDS
The Priority Plan for Expenditure of each county is a list of eligible jurisdictions within
the County to whore portions of the county allocation will be made showing the amount
allocated to each jurisdiction.
r
I
w/a+'JL
. t
ALLOCATION OF MONIES
Upon the consensus of eligihle applicants, it is recommended that 20°lam be allocated for
use by the East Bay Regional Park District and that 80% of the funds be reserved for local
eligible jurisdictions. In terms of dollars, this would amount to•, $457,831 dollars for the
East Bay Regional Park District and $1,831,324 dollars for local Jurisdictions. i
The local allocation is derived by dividing the local allocation share ($1,831,324) by the
County population(650,155). This yields a per capita allocation of $2.82 ($2.816); Table I
indicates the allocation plan.
ASSIGNMENT OF POPULATION TO ELIGIBLE AGENCIES FOR THE PER CAPITA
ALLOCATION OF FUNDS
The allocation process is based on the concept that a person can be counted only once for
the allocation of local funds. The decision criteria is as follows:
I.) All persons residing in entities which are neither cities nor multi-county
districts would be assigned to the intra-county district within which they live (some
city residents fall into this category; i.e., Pleasant Hill, Brentwood and Lafayette)
2.) All persons not assigned under (I.) and who live in an incorporated city would be
assigned to that city.
3.) All persons who live in the Dublin/San Ramon Community Services District
would be assigned to that district.
4.) Where overlap in boundaries occurrs between local jurisdictions or there is an
agreement to pool resources beyond these rules, the allocation will be by agreement
of the respective local jurisdictions..
5.) Funds will be provided to Hercules, Clayton, Brentwood Park and Recreation
District and the Kensington Communities Services District to bring them up to a
total of $20,000 to qualify for a minimum project. These funds will come from
unincorporated areas not part of any recreational agency.
6.) All other population not included within eligible jurisdictions will be allocated to
existing county service areas as shown on Table 2.
APPROVAL OF THE PRIORITY PLAN BY ELIGIBLE AGENCIES
The priority plan for expenditure of the total county allocation shall be approved by at
least 50 percent of the cities and districts representing 50 percent of the population of
the cities and districts within the County, and by the County Board of Supervisors.
A listing of cities and eligible jurisdictions is included in Table 2 along with the population
to be utilized in voting approval. Approval of cities and eligible jurisdictions consists of a
resolution from these jurisdictions to the Board of Supervisors in support of the Priority
Plan for Expenditure.
Using the population -in Table 3, the approval of 13 jurisdictions with a population in
excess of,314,330 is needed to meet the requirements for approval of the Priority Plan.
r
2
1
ti
The formula of population for acceptability of eligible agencies shall be based can .the
following voting criteria;
1. Each city has a vete representing its population.
2. Each autonomous eligible district has a vote representing its populotion(exeluding
populaf ion already crux-ited in cities).
3. EBRPD hats a vote representing its papulation not already included in a City pr.
district and being within its boundaries.
4. EBMUD population is included in other jurisdictions and will vote as a jurisdiction "
only.
D#3b
I
k 3
i
i Y
TABLE 1
PRIORITY PLAN! FOR. EXPENDITURE
CALIFORNIA PARKLANDS ACT OF 49W
AGENCY ALLOCATION
Ambrose Recreation & Park District 29,300
Brentwood Recreation & Park Districtl 20,000
City of Antioch 119,010
City of Clayton 20,000 _
City of Concord 286,920
City of E1 Cerrito 63,903
City of Nercules2 20,000
City of Lafayette 9 9414
City of Martinez 61 ,315
City of Pinole 40,246
City of Pittsburg 91 ,891
City of Richmond 209,051
City of San Pablo3 62,014
City of Walnut Creek4 197,372
Contra Costa County5 361 ,116
Dublin-San Ramon Community Services District 41 ,3.16
I East Bay Regional Park District 457,831
Kensington Community Services District2 20,000
Pleasant dill Recreation & Park District6 85,055
Town of Moraga7 43L395
Total Allocation $ 21289, 155
1. e allocation was brought up to a minimum of $20,000 to allow this agency to be
eligible. Brentwood's city allocation is enclosed.
1
1
2. These allocations were brought up to the minimum project of $20,000 to allow the
agency to be el igiblh.
3. The popilation within Rollingwood _ Willart Recreation & Park District of 2,279
people was added into the City of Son Pablo allocation.
4. The city allocation includes the unincorporated population for County Service Area
R-8 of 17,341 people.
5. This allocation represents projects under the control of the Board of Supervisors for,
county service areas and for other Board projects. Table 2 provides guidance on +
County service area allocations.
6. Pleasant HilI Recreation & Park District includes the City of Pleasant Hill
allocation.
7. The Morogn allocation includes credit for the 352 people that reside in County
Service Area R-4.
D#3b
r
TABLE 2
t,LLOCATION FOR COUNTY SERVICE AREA
AND COUNTY PROGRAMS
Oakley, Lib-1 1 $ 20,000
Clyde, M-16 20,000
Montarabay, M-17 26,565
Crockett, P-1 20,000
Orinda, R-6 46,696
San Ramon Valley,* R-7 105,493
El Sobrante, R-9 29f73 1
Unallocated Reserves 92,631
Total County Allocation $ 361 1 16
*R-7 allocation includes CSA R-5 and Green Valley Recreation & Park Districts
D#3b
j
j
TABLE 3
APPLICABLE 1980 POPULATIONS
FOR STATE BOND ACT APPROVAL PROCESS
Recreation and Park Districts 1980 Population
Ambrose 10,402 '
Brentwood (excluding city) 448
Green Valley (included in R-7) 1 ,217 `
Pleasant Hill (excluding city) 4,590
Roll ingwood-Wi lar t 21279
Subtotal 18,936
Other Eligible Local Districts
Bethel Island Municipal Improvement District 1 ,685
Kensington Community Services District 5 344
Subtotal ,029
Cities
Antioch 42,251
Brentwood 4,384
Clayton 4,266
Concord 101 ,862
El Cerrito 22,689
Hercules 5,907
Lafayette 21 ,093
Martinez 21 ,768
Moraga 14,983
Pinole 14,288
Pittsburg 32,623
Pleasant Hill 25,342
Richmond 74,217
San Pablo 19,737
Wolnut Creek 52 730
Subtotal54040
Intercounty Districts
East Bay Municipal Utility District (included in EBRPD) -0-
East Bay Regional Park District 129,886
Dublin/San Rat-non Community Services District 14,668
D#3b
r
EXHIBIT B
LOCAL APPROVAL
In Contra Costa County there are 25 eligible agencies with a population of 628,659 people
living in those jurisdictions (as discussed in the Priority Plan on page 2). Approval of 1'3
jurisdictions representing 314,330 people are needed to satisfy the requirements -of the
low, prior to Hoard approval of the plan. As of the morning can February 24, •1981, the
following agencies have acted: Their actions satisfy the requirements of the law.
Eligible Approval
Agency 1980 Population Date
4
Local Recreation and Park Agencies
Ambrose recreation and Park District 10,402 2-19-81
Brentwood Recreation and Park District 448 2-19-81
Kensington Community Services District 5,344 2-23-81
• Pleasant Hill recreation and Park District 4,590 2-11-81
Cities
Clayton 4,266 2-19-81
Concord 101 ,862 2-2 -81
El Cerrito 22,689 2-17-81
Martinez 21 ,768 2-I8-81
Morago 14,983 2-2-81
Pinole 14,288 2-17-81
Pleasant Hill 25,342 2-23-81
Richmond 74,217 2-17-81
San Pablo 19,737 2-17-81
Walnut Creek 529730 2-17-81
Intercountry Districts
East flay Regions) Park District 129,8136 2-17•-81
Dublin/San Damon Community Services District 14,668 2-17-8I.
Number of agencies Population represented
which voted as of by those agencies which
2-24-81 is 16 voted as of 2-24-81
is 517,220
D#3a