The URL can be used to link to this page

Home My WebLink AboutMINUTES - 06061995 - 1.1 (3) 1.95 through 1. 100 THE BOARD OR SUPERVISORS OF CONTRA COSTA COUNTY, CALIFORNIA Adopted this Order on _June 6, 1995 by the following vote: AYES: Supervisors Rogers, Smith, DeSaulnier, Torlakson, Bishop NOES: None ABSENT: None ABSTAIN: None ------------------------------------------------------------------- SUBJECT: Correspondence 1.95 LETTER from Robert A. Baker, Deputy Chief Engineer, Central Contra Costa Sanitary District, 5019 Imhoff Place, Martinez, CA 94553- 4392, expressing concern with the policy in the Land use and Resource Management Plan for the Primary Zone of the Delta which may be interpreted to restrict the beneficial reuse of both water and biosolids. ***REFERRED TO WATER COMMITTEE AND HEALTH SERVICES DIRECTOR 1.96 LETTER from Linda Arcularius, Chairperson, Board of Supervisor, County of Inyo, P. O. Box N, Independence, CA 93526, urging support for the repeal of the Mountain Lion Preservation Act. ***REFERRED TO COUNTY ADMINISTRATOR 1.97 LETTER from John Caffrey, Chairman, State Water Resources Control Board, P. O. Box 100, Sacramento, CA 95812-0100, in response to the Board's letter, referred to the discharge of agricultural drainage to the Bay-Delta Estuary, and advising that any application for a discharge permit will be subject to the public review process. ***REFERRED TO WATER COMMITTEE 1.98 LETTER from Ken Etherington, Browning-Ferris Industries, P. 0. Box 23164, Pleasant Hill, CA 94523, expressing support for a workshop for the dissemination of factual information on special waste disposal. ***REFERRED TO DIRECTOR, GROWTH MANAGEMENT AND ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT AGENCY 1.99 RESOLUTION adopted by the City Council, City of Orinda, 26 Orinda Way, Orinda, CA 94563, requesting the cancellation and refund of property taxes in the amount of $2,714.70 paid upon the purchase of the Orinda Oaks property for use as a public parkland. ***REFERRED TO TREASURER-TAX COLLECTOR, COUNTY COUNSEL, AND ASSESSOR FOR RECOMMENDATION 1.100 LETTER from Matt Fong, Treasurer, Office of the State Treasurer, Sacramento, California, requesting that the Board write to the appropriate Congressional Committee Chairs encouraging the Federal Government to increase the amount of Mortgage Credit Certificates and Bonds California can issue for housing and other public benefits. ***REFERRED TO COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT DIRECTOR IT IS BY THE BOARD ORDERED that the recommendations as noted (***) are APPROVED. . cc: Correspondents County Administrator Water Committee I hereby certify that this is a true and correct copy of Health Services Director an action taken and entered on the minutes of the GMEDA Boar+of Supervisors on the date shown. Treasurer-Tax Collector ATTESTED: County Counsel PHIL ATCHELOR,Clerk of the Board Assessor of Supervisors and County Administrator Community Development Director Deputy RECEIVED STATE OF CALIFORNIA MATT FONG, Treasurer OFFICE OF THE TREASURER MAY SACRAMENTO CLERK BOARD OF SUPERVISORS CONTRA COSTA CO. May 15, 1995 GAYLE BISHOP CONTRA COSTA CO BOARD OF SUPERVISORS ICO ADMIN BLDG 651 PINE ST ROOM 106 MARTINEZ CA, 94553-1293 i As you may already know, the California Debt Limit Allocation Committee, of which I am Chairman, changed its procedures on May 3, 1995. The changes were prompted due to the overwhelming demand for this year's allocation of tax-exempt debt- issuance authority, approximately $5.4 billion in demand for an allocation of$1.57 billion. Of particular interest to many Californians was the future of the Mortgage Credit Certificate program. In February of this year, Committee staff recommended elimination of MCCs based upon a benefit analysis they prepared that compared Mortgage Revenue Bonds to MCCs. Local issuers of MCCs objected to program elimination,primarily noting that MRBs would not serve all areas of California, in particular the high-cost areas In response to your concerns, I supported continuation of the Mortgage Credit Certificate program and increased funding for the program by several hundred million dollars. I believe Certificates are a viable alternative to bond financing and needed to serve all of California. I greatly appreciate the public input I received as we worked our way through these important policy considerations. Your input and energy has a great impact on policy making, and I would like you to use that energy to further help our state. I would, like you to take a moment, and a postage stamp, and help me convince the Congress and the Clinton Administration that we need more housing assistance in California. Enclosed is a letter I have signed to encourage the federal government to increase the amount of Mortgage Credit Certificates and bonds California can issue for housing and, other public benefits. I would like you to co-sign the letter and return it to me. I will then take your letter to Washington, D.C. to share our proposal with the officials in charge of the federal budget. Let's continue to work together to expand California's economy and housing market. Warmest regards, Matt Fong State Treasurer MF:dm . af�e'T�re 00 MAT-F IFON G Treasurer of tllle State of (�chfurnia March 30, 1995 The Honorable Robert Rubin The Honorable Bill Archer Secretary of the Treasury Chairman, House Ways & Means Committee 1500 Pennsylvania Avenue - 1102 LHOB - Washington, DC 20220 Washington, DC 20515 The Honorable Bob.Packwood Chairman, Senate Finance Committee 205 SDOB Washington, DC 20510 Dear Secretary Rubin, Senator Packwood, Congressman Archer: I am writing to urge you to restore the amount of private-activity,bond allocation to an annual amount of$75 per capita. In California, there is tremendous demand for capital to build'housing, begin small businesses, provide student loans and clean up the environment. The present amount of bond allocation authority, at $50 per capita, is woefully insufficient to help California help itself to full economic recovery. As chairman of the California Debt Limit Allocation Committee (CDLAC), I oversee the allocation of bond authority. In.our most recent survey of demand for tax-exempt financing, respondents reported they could use up to $5.4 billion of tax-exempt bonds and mortgage credit certificates. This is nearly three-and-one-half times the amount of allocation currently available in our state. It is my understanding that the $75 per capita cap was revised down to $50 when single- family housing and small issue bonds were scheduled to expire. The original cap has not been restored even though single-family housing and small issue bonds were reauthorized permanently in 1993. My request for a 50% increase, from the current $50 per capita, would help us create an additional 12,000 jobs, assist over 7,000 first-time home buyers, provide a college education to another 6,000 low-income students, and further our efforts to clean up our environment. 915 CAPITOL MALL SACRAMENTO. CALIFORNIA 95814 • 1916) 653-2995 S.peretary Rubin, Senator Packwood, Congressman Archer Page 2 March 30, 1995 I am not making this request alone. I have asked members of the public who are interested in raising the debt limit cap to join with me and sign this letter. We believe now is the time to act as the Congress reevaluates and reformulates its priorities. In California, we believe we know how to invest money in public benefit programs as well as anyone. We appreciate your consideration of our request, and look forward to your help. Warmest regards, Sincerely, Ma Fo A Californian State Treasurer For $75 Per Capita (print name)