HomeMy WebLinkAboutMINUTES - 05251993 - 1.35 1 -3y
TO: BOARD OF SUPERVISORS Contra
FROM:
Phil Batchelor, County Administrator " \' Costa
Count
v
May 20, 1993 �s.T_ ��Ty
DATE: i"C OU.f
SUBJECT: RESOLUTION SUPPORTING STATE LEGISLATION WHICH WOULD PROHIBIT
THE PASSAGE OF UNFUNDED .STATE MANDATE LEGISLATION
SPECIFIC REQUEST(S)OR RECOMMENDATION(S)&BACKGROUND AND JUSTIFICATION
RECOMMENDATION:
1 . ADOPT the attached Resolution which would support any and all
State legislation which would end the practice of imposing
State mandates on local governments and ensure that the State
Government pays the costs incurred by local governments in
complying with certain requirements under State Statutes and
regulations .
2 . DIRECT the County Administrator to furnish copies of the
attached Resolution to the members of this County's
Legislative Delegation.
3 . AUTHORIZE the Chairman to sign a letter to the Sacramento
County Board of Supervisors advising them of this Board's
action.
BACKGROUND:
Recently the Sacramento County Board of Supervisors adopted a
Resolution supporting the introduction of State legislation which
would specify that any requirement under a State Statute or
regulation that a local government conduct an activity shall apply
to the government only if all funds necessary to pay the direct
costs incurred by the government in conducting the activity are
provided by the State Government. While such law exists, it
contains loopholes which has allowed the Legislature to continue to
impose unfunded mandates on local governments .
,/ L
CONTINUED ON ATTACHMENT: --y YES SIGNATURE:
1L_RECOMMENDATION OF COUNTY ADMINISTRATOR RECOMMENDATION OF BOARD COMMITTEE �b
APPROVE OTHER
SIGNATURE(S):
ACTION OF BOARD ON —May 25, 1993 APPROVED AS RECOMMENDED OTHER _..
VOTE OF SUPERVISORS
I HEREBY CERTIFY THAT THIS IS A TRUE
UNANIMOUS(ABSENT ~ ) AND CORRECT COPY OF AN ACTION TAKEN
AYES: NOES: AND ENTERED ON THE MINUTES OF THE BOARD
ABSENT: ABSTAIN: OF SUPERVISORS ON THE DATE SHOWN.
ATTESTED MAY 2 5 1993
Contact: PHIL BATCHELOR,CLERK OF THE BOARD OF
cc: County Administrator SUPERVISORS AND COUNTY ADMINISTRATOR
Members, Legislative Delegation (Via CAO)
Steve Swendiman, Executive Director, CSAC
BY DEPUTY
-2-
Supervisor Torlakson has asked that we place this Resolution on the
agenda for consideration by the Board of Supervisors . The
correspondence received from Sacramento County is attached for the
Board' s information.
Passage and enforcement of legislation along these lines would
certainly relieve enormous future financial burdens on local
governments and therefore deserves to be supported by the Board of
Supervisors .
IN THE BOARD OF SUPERVISORS
OF
CONTRA COSTA COUNTY, STATE OF CALIFORNIA
In the Matter of Supporting State )
Legislation to Abolish Unfunded ) RESOLUTION NO. 93/282
State Mandates )
WHEREAS, the State Government has consistently passed legislation
which mandates activities or responsibilities on Contra Costa
County and other local government entities; and,
WHEREAS, these mandates frequently result in new programs or
requirements with substantial costs; and,
WHEREAS, the costs of these mandates are, in the absence of state
appropriations to implement the mandates, shifted to local
government without any long or short-term reimbursements; and,
WHEREAS, these unfunded mandates result in a substantial financial
burden on Contra Costa County and result in the inability of Contra
Costa County to provide basic local government services to its
citizens;
NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT BY THE BOARD OF SUPERVISORS OF THE COUNTY OF
CONTRA COSTA RESOLVED: that the Board of Supervisors supports the
introduction of State legislation which would end the practice of
imposing State mandates on local governments and ensure that the
State Government pays the costs incurred by local governments in
complying with certain requirements under State Statutes and
regulations, and
BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED: that the County Administrator provide a
copy of this Resolution to each member of this County' s Legislative
Delegation.
PASSED and ADOPTED by unanimous vote of the Board on the 25th day
of May, 1993.
I hereby certify that the foregoing is a true and correct copy of
an order entered on the minutes of the Board of Supervisors on the
date aforesaid.
Witness my hand and the seal of
the Board of Supervisors
of f ixed this 25th day of May,
1993 .
Phil Batchelor, Clerk of the
Board of Supervisors and County
Administrator
By
(—,,/Ieputy C116rk
RESOLUTION NO. 93/ 282
`l
CHAIRMAN
BOARD OF SUPERVISORS GRANTLAND JOHNSON
COUNTY OF SACRAMENTO SUPERV`�S6)OR4405 851STRICT
700 H STREET, SUITE 2450 • SACRAMENTO, CA 95814 FAX(916)440-7593
March 3 , 1993
To: Chairpersons, County Boards of Supervisors
From: GRANTLAND JOHNSON, Chairman
Sacramento County Board of Supervisors
Subject: FEDERAL AND STATE MANDATES
On February 23, 1993, the Sacramento County Board of Supervisors
adopted two resolutions supporting legislation to require the
federal and state governments to completely finance any local
mandates. I am enclosing copies of those resolutions for your
information and consideration.
GRANTLAND JOHNSON, Chairman
Board of Supervisors
GJ/BS:gp
cc: Steve Swendiman, Executive Director
California State Association of Counties
Enclosures
COUNTY OF SACRAMENTO
CALIFORNIA
FOR THE AGENDA OF:
February 23 , 1993
To: Board of Supervisors BY RESOLUTION #XF3
BOARD OF SUPERVISORS
From: County Executive's Office FEB 2 3 1993
Subject: FEDERAL AND STATE MANDATES
°per i o the Board.
RECOMMENDATIONS:
That the Board of Supervisors approve the two attached resolutions which would
demonstrate the desire of Sacramento County Supervisors that both Federal and State
Governments be required to completely finance any local mandates.
SUMMARY:
Recently, Supervisor Toby Johnson forwarded to my office the attached letter he received from
Congressman Gary Condit of Modesto asking for support of a House bill he wishes to sponsor
which would require the Federal Government to finance any state or local mandates that it
enacts.
Supervisor T. Johnson asked for my recommendations on this matter, and I suggest your Board
adopt the attached resolution which supports Congressman Condit's legislation and forward that
resolution to the Congressman, as well as to other local Congressional Representatives and our
two Federal Senators.
In addition, I recommend your Board adopt a similar resolution asking our state representatives
to propose a similar bill for unfunded state mandates.
ANALYSIS:
While the problem of unfunded mandates in Sacramento is mainly one associated with the State,
the Federal Government also contributes to our fiscal malaise by passing laws which
substantially impact local governments without providing financial support for such ventures.
A current example is the recently passed Americans with Disabilities Act (1990). This law will
result in millions of dollars in capital costs if Sacramento County is to comply (e.g., it will cost
over $4 million to bring the County Courthouse into compliance, and this is simply one
FEDERAL AND STATE MANDATES
Page 2
building!). The Federal Government has not provided any financial relief for this type of action.
While T support the intent of the law, little to no thought regarding the fiscal impacts on local
governments was made.
In addition, President Clinton is contemplating supporting the "motor-voter" bill which, if
passed, would result in automatic voter registration when a person registers their vehicle. While
beneficial in registering new voters, the bill as drafted would result in hundreds of thousands of
dollars in new direct county costs. Currently, there is no intention to backfill the local
governments for these costs, although Registrar. of ..Voters Ernest Hawkins is lobbying the
Clinton Administration very hard to include such funding. Still, while I support easier
registration and more full participation in the election process, the dollars to fund these efforts
must come from other places than local government. This type of mandated cost must stop if
local governments are ever to regain any control over their fiscal resources.
While federal mandates are very problematic, they are only the tip of the iceberg compared with
the unfunded state mandates. As your Board is well aware, these mandates are at the heart of
our current budget crisis. Unfortunately, while we, and other. counties, continue to loudly
oppose these mandates, the State continues to exacerbate the problem. Given this, I suggest
that your Board also pass a similar resolution which expresses a desire on the part of the Board
of Supervisors that the State pass similar legislation. We should then forward this resolution.to
our local.delegation as well as the Governor's Office. While it may fall on deaf ears, we must
continue to educate the State Legislature of our plight and demand that the State not balance its
budget on the backs of local government. Maybe the recent struggle that Governor Wilson has
been waging with the Federal Government for additional funding for services to illegal
immigrants will make him more sensitive to our similar complaints of unfunded state mandates.
Respectfully submitted,
BOB SMITH
County Executive
PJH:dw
Attachments
(w:\agenda\mandate s.bd m)
RESOLUTION NO. 9370239
WHEREAS, the Federal Government has consistently passed legislation which mandates
activities or responsibilities to Sacramento County and other local government entities; and,
WHEREAS, these mandates frequently result in new programs or requirements with
substantial costs; and,
WHEREAS, the costs of these mandates are, in the absence of federal appropriations to
implement the mandates, shifted to state or local government without any long- or short-term
reimbursements; and,
WHEREAS, these unfunded mandates result in a substantial financial burdens on
Sacramento County and result in an inability of Sacramento County to provide basic local
governments services to its citizens.
THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED that the Board of Supervisors supports the proposed
Federal legislation which is being sponsored by Congressman Gary Condit which would end the
practice of imposing Federal mandates on state or local governments and ensure that the Federal
Government pays the costs incurred by those governments in complying with certain
requirements under Federal Statutes and regulations.
On a motion by Supervisor M. Johnson seconded by Supervisor
the foregoing resolution was passed and adopted by the Board of
Supervisors of the County of Sacramento, State of California, this 23rd day of February ,
19 93 , by the following vote, to wit:
AYES: Supervisors , Cox, M. Johnson, T. Johnson, G. Johnson
NOES: Supervisors , None
ABSENT: Supervisors , Collin —
ChairnYan of the Board of Supe isors
of Sacramento County California
f ;_� '� "` ', ta:tco-�:..c±r:ii�yc::ai5iC3e;!".cG:�e�ar..t�tC•�Geot
Stat_of Csfi:wria:uei^f thi:decumtM t is Wen
jr� ;. ;.•• • �.- .t c:ule^.'.:arn�i-:tinnaao'thew:rdct:,•�tarvtsor.•6arry
St:-tmanta as
�
EST
rk oft oard of Superviso EFEB 2 3 1993
C iti pR'`�1 edmnn.res) FEB 2 J 1993 BY
i:.idty hCG`..Bmrd e.Stvff s
A- 'fes -RYIL� S ,
b `�:Svc
RESOLUTION NO. 93-0240
WHEREAS, the State Government has consistently passed legislation which mandates
activities or responsibilities to Sacramento County and other local government entities; and,
WHEREAS, these mandates frequently result in new programs or requirements with
substantial costs; and,
WHEREAS, the costs of these mandates are, in the absence of state appropriations to
implement the mandates, shifted to local government without any long- or short-term
reimbursements; and,
WHEREAS, these unfunded mandates result in a substantial financial burdens on
Sacramento County and result in an inability of Sacramento County to provide basic local
governments services to its citizens; and,
WHEREAS, equal protection should be recognized by the State in that they are currently
claiming that the Federal Government is acting irresponsibly by not funding mandated services
to illegal immigrants while they practice similar treatment in state mandates to local
governments.
THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED that the Board of Supervisors supports state
legislation being introduced would end the practice of imposing state mandates on local
governments and ensure that the State pays the costs incurred by those governments in
complying with certain requirements.under state statutes and regulations.
On a motion by Supervisor M. Johnson seconded by Supervisor
Cox the foregoing resolution was passed and adopted by the Board of
Supervisors of the County of Sacramento, State of California, this 23rd day of February ,
19 93 , by the following vote, to wit:
AYES: Supervisors , Cox, M. Johnson, T. Johnson, G. Johnson
NOES: Supervisors . None
ABSENT: Supervisors Collin
tet'' °r Chairman of the Board of Su ervisors
of Sacramento County California
�' r �` t rxntCcGcot
�:,v�'••: ";
an n" :Cc:r.
t,. ..A• \ fh. sta!:cl is:ii'Mma a UP ct thi.dc_urtu M Lcs b,^en
�_ l N 6:ii:e^vtartitia�:naaolthe2o:rdet s7er.Counb
�; i C ct craNMU an
® FI EIB 2 3 19
rk oft Board of Supe rsL- E
c:r� — 93
21�. I
. =
(w:\agenda S\tateman.res) FEB 2 3 1SO!'Of 3 By
'7Lf_&-'%D Of SUKRASCIRS
BY
m.F_@fytOF THE B'16.P.rr
_ GARV A. CONDIT1529 LONGWORTH BUILDIN:,
WASHINGTON.DC 20515-0515
15TH DISTRICT,CALIFORNIA 12021 225-613
COMMITTEE ON AGRICULTURE DISTRICT OFFICES
FEDERAL BUILDING
SUBCOMMITTEE ON 415 WEST ISTH STREET
COTTON.RICE.AND SUGAR ,y�} ems+ MERCED.CA 9534C
SUBCOMMITTEE ON Congrea of the Mnntteb tate' 1209)383-4455
LIVESTOCK.DAIRY,AND POULTRY A ]Qe e e e 920 13TH STREET
JoDuze of R preoentatlbeg MODESTO.CA 95354
COMMITTEE ON (2091527-1914
GOVERNMENT OPERATIONSECCCEgVL Wa0bington MIC 20515-0515 '5TH CT
V � TOLL FREE FREE:
SUBCOMMITTEE ON �- 1-800•-356-6424
GOVERNMENT-INFORMATION.
JUSTICE,AND AGRICULTURE 0V O 1992
GOVERNMENT ACTIVITIES November 3 , 1992
AND TRANSPORTATION .,nPfln(1C Cl Inc-,
The Honorable Toby Johnson
Chairperson
Sacramento County Board of Supervisors
700 H Street, Suite 2450
Sacramento, California 95814
Dear Chairperson:
I am writing to you to ask for your assistance in putting an end
to unfunded federal mandates on local and state governments.
During the last session of Congress, I made an attempt to amend
the Voting Rights Language Assistance Act of 1992 so that the federal
government would pay for the added costs incurred by local governments
for implementation of this law. This amendment was defeated by only 2
votes on the House floor. During a mark-up on August 11, 1992 the
Chairman of the House Committee on Government Operations, Representa-
tive Conyers (D-MI) , agreed to work with me on this issue. As you
know, this Committee has jurisdiction over federal mandates.. I have
enclosed a draft of proposed legislation which would require the
federal government finance any state and local government mandates it
enacts.
We need to take immediate action to ensure that the federal
government does not continue to put additional unfunded mandates on
state and local governments. We also need .hard data on the cost of
eyistiang federal mandates on local aru state governments so that we
can demonstrate to Congress and the Administration the magnitude of
the problem.
If we are going to succeed in this effort, we need your support.
I urge you to adopt a resolution supporting an end to unfunded federal
mandates on local and state governments and to assess the fiscal
impact of existing federal mandates on your jurisdiction -- how much
they cost and the amount and source of revenue that needs to be raised
to offset them.
THIS STATIONERY PRINTED ON PAPER MADE OF RECYCLED FIBERS
The Honorable Toby Johnson
November 3, 1992
Page 2
I look forward to hearing from you in the very near future on
this issue of importance to the cities and counties of California. I .
would also appreciate your comments on the enclosed draft copy of my
legislation. Please feel free to telephone me if you would like to
discuss this matter with me directly.
Sincerely,
GARY A. CONDIT
Member of Congress
GAC/jm
r:\M\C0NDIT\C0NDIT.011 VDiscunion Draft] H.L.C.
[DISCUSSION DRAFT]
OCTOBER. 30, 1992
103D CONGFXSS
16T SEssiov He Re
INT THE HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES
Mr. CONDTT introduced the follmring bill; which was referred to the
Committee on
A BILL
To end the practice of imposing unfunded Federal mandates
on State and local governments and to ensure that the
Federal Government pars the costs incurred by those
governments in complying with certain requirements
under Federal statutes and regulations.
1 Be it enacted by the Senate and Souse of Representa-
2 tives of the United States of America in Congress assembled,
3 SECTION 1. SHORT TITLE.
4 This Act may be cited as the "Federal Mandate Re-
5 lief Act of 1993".
r
F:\M\CONDIT\CONDIT.011 @isoussion-DraM HL.C.
2
1 BEC. Q. FINDINGS AND PURPOSE.
2 (a) Flx im;s.—The Congress finds and declares
3 that;---
4 (1) unftanded Federal mandates on State and
5 local governments have become increasingly exten-
6 sive in recent years;
7 (2) such mandates have, in many instances,
8 added to growing deficits in State and local budgets
9 and have resulted in the need for State and local
10 governments to increase revenue or +curtail services;
11 and
12 (3) such excessive fiscal burdens on State and
13 local governments have undermined, in many in-
14 stances, the ability of State and local governments
15 to achieve their responsibilities under State and local
16 law.
17 (b) PunPOSE.---The purpose of this Act is to assur=e
18 that the Federal Government pays the total amount of di-
19 rect costs incurred by State and local gavernments in eom-
20 plying with certain requirements which take effect on or
21 after the date of the enactment of this Act under a Fed.
22 eral statute or regulation.
23 sEc. s.FEDERAL FUNDING RsqumEmm.
24 (a) IN GEr'ERAL.---Notwithstanding any other provi-
25 sion of law, any requirement under a Federal statute or
26 regulation that a State or local government conduct an
PAM\CONDITWONDIT.011 [Discussion Draft] H.L.C.
3 '
1 activity (including a requirement that a government meet
.2 national standards in prmiding a senice) shall apph• to
{ 3 the government only if all funds necessary to pay the di-
4 rect costs incurred by the government in conducting the
S activity are provided by the Federal Government.
6 (b) APPwC.ATIon---This section shall apply only to
7 requirements which take effect on or after the date of the
8 enactment of this Act.