Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAboutMINUTES - 03212000 - C.42- C.44 TO: BOARD Or SUPERVISORS Centra PHIL BATCHELOR, COUNTY ADMINISTRATOR Costa osta March 9, 2000 County DATE: co SUBJECT: LEGISLATION: AB 2296 (DUTRA) SPECIFIC REQUEST(S)OR RECOMMENDATION(S)6 BACKGROUND AND JUSTIFICATION RECOMMENDATION: AGREE to CO-SPONSOR AB 2296 by Assemblyman John Dutra, which would allow Contra Costa County to utilize the "design-build" method of construction for major County construction projects. BACKGROUND: The Board's 2000 Legislative Program includes the following item: 1110. CO-SPONSOR with the Alameda County Board of Supervisors legislation that would authorize Contra Costa County to use the "design-build" method of construction under which the County obtains both the design and construction of a building from a single source and that would extend the current sunset of January 1, 2001." Undercurrent law,Alameda, Sacramento, Santa Clara,Solano and Tulare counties to utilize a method of awarding bids for design and construction of county facilities known as "design-build" where both the design of the project and the construction of the project are awarded to a single entity, which is qualified to provide contracting, architectural, and engineering services. This authority expires December 31, 2000. These counties have found that the use of the design-build CONTINUED ON ATTACHMENT: YES SIGNATURE: Z , � '�d�/��✓�f �. RECOMMENDATION OF COUNTY ADMINISTRATOR RECOMMENDATION OF BOARD COMMITTEE APPROVE OTHER SIGNATURE(S): / ACTION OF BOARD ON march z-1, 2006 APPROVED AS RECOMMENDED ALI OTHER VOTE OF SUPERVISORS I HEREBY CERTIFY THAT THIS IS A TRUE XX 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 March 21; 2000 Contact: PHIL BATCHELOR,CLERK OF THE BOARD OF CG: See Page 2 SUPERVISORS AND COUNTY ADMINISTRATOR BY "4h&t-/ DEPUTY 67 mechanism speeds up the bidding and construction of county projects substantially. They are interested in continuing to have this authority. Contra Costa County has asked to be added to this authority. Alameda County has asked Assemblyman Dutra to carry this legislation and he has introduced AB 2296 for this purpose. In view of the fact that AB 2296 is consistent with an element of the Board's 2000 Legislative Program, it is recommended that the Board agree to co-sponsor AB 2296 with Alameda County. cc: County Administrator Public Works Director Director of General Services Director, Capital Facilities and Debt Management County Counsel Assemblyman John Dutra Room 6011 State Capitol Sacramento, CA 95814 Les Spahnn: Heim, Noack, Kelly & Spahnn 1121 L Street, Suite 100 Sacramento, CA 95814 -2- CALIFORNIA LEGISLATUREL--1999-2000 REGULAR SESSION ASSEMBLE'` BILL No, 2296 Introduced by Assembly Member Dutra February 24, 2000 An act to add Section 20133 to the Public Contract Code, relating to public contracts. LEGISLATIVE COUNSEL'S DIGEST AE 2296, as introduced, Dutra. County design-build contracts. Existing law requires public entities to comply with certain procedures in soliciting and evaluating bids and awarding contracts for the erection, construction, alteration, repair, or improvement of any public structure, building, road, or other public improvement. Existing law authorizes specified state agencies, cities, and counties to implement alternative procedures for the awarding of contracts on a design-build basis. This bill would authorize certain counties to enter into design-build contracts, as defined, according to specified procedures. The bill would require each contract to prohibit construction or alteration of any project without the prior written approval of the plans by the county. Vote: majority. Appropriation: no. Fiscal committee: no. State-mandated local program: no. 99 I AB 2296 —2— The 2—The people of the State of California do enact as follows: 1 SECTION 1. Section 20133 is added to the Public 2 Contract Code, to read: 3 20133. (a) This section provides for an alternative 4 procedure on bidding on building construction projects 5 applicable only in the Counties of Alameda, Contra Costa, 6 Sacramento, Santa Clara, Solano, and `Flare, upon 7 approval of the appropriate board of supervisors. 8 (b) If a board of supervisors elects to proceed under 9 this section, it shall evaluate the traditional design,. bid, 10 build process of county construction and the design-build 11 process prior to adopting a resolution approving the use 12 of a design-build contract pursuant to this section. 13 (c) For purposes of this section, the following terms 14 have the following meanings: 15 (1) "Best value" means a value determined by 16 objective criteria and may include, but is not limited to, 17 price, features, functions, life-cycle costs, and other 18 criteria deemed appropriate by the county. 19 (2) "Design-build" means a procurement process in 20 which both the design and construction of a project are 21 procured from a single entity. 22 (3) "Design-build entity" means a partnership, 23 corporation, or other legal entity that is able to provide 24 appropriately licensed contracting, architectural, and 25 engineering services as needed pursuant to a design-build 26 contract. 27 (d) Design-build projects shall progress in a three-step 28 process, as follows: 29 (1) The county board of supervisors shall prepare a set 30 of documents setting forth the scope of the project. The 31 documents may include, but are not limited to, the size, 32 type and desired design character of the buildings and 33 site, performance specifications covering the quality of 34 materials, equipment, and workmanship, preliminary 35 plans or building layouts, or any other information 36 deemed necessary to describe adequately the county's 37 needs. The performance specifications and any plans shall -3— AB 2296 1 be prepared by an independent architect duly licensed 2 and registered in California. 3 (2) (A) The county shall establish a procedure to 4 prequalify design-build entities using a standard 5 questionnaire developed by the county. In preparing the 5 questionnaire, the county shall consult with the 7 construction industry, including representatives of the 8 building trades, surety industry, cities, and other affected 9 parties. This questionnaire shall require information 10 including, but not limited to, all of the following: 11 (i) A listing of all subcontractors that the design-build 12 entity will use as a part of the design-build entity at the 13 time of bid. All subcontractors that are listed at the time 14 of bid shall be afforded all of the protections contained in 15 Chapter 4 (commencing with Section 4100) of Part 1. 16 (ii) Evidence that the members of the design-build 17 entity have completed, or demonstrated the experience, 18 competency, capability, and capacity to complete 19 projects of similar size, scope, or complexity, and that 20 proposed key personnel have sufficient experience and 21 training to competently manage and complete the design 22 and construction of the project. 23 (iii) The licenses, registration, and credentials 24 required to design and construct the project, including 25 information on the revocation or suspension of any 26 license,credential, or registration. 27 (iv) Evidence that establishes that the design-build 28 entity has the capacity to obtain all required payment and 29 performance bonding, liability insurance, and errors and 30 omissions insurance, as well as a financial statement that 31 assures the county that the design-build entity has the 32 capacity to complete the project. 33 (v) Any prior serious or willful violation of the 34 California Occupational Safety and Health Act of 1973, 35 contained in Part 1 (commencing with Section 5300) of 35 Division 5 of the Labor Code or the federal Occupational 37 Safety and Health Act of 1970 (Public Law 91-595), settled 38 against any member of the design-build entity, and 39 information concerning a contractor member's workers' 9 TO: BOARD OF SUPERVISORS .�:s _ Contra FROM: PHIL BATCHELOR, COUNTY ADMINISTRATOR Costa - . March 9, 2000 County DATE: tri cr x SUBJECT" LEGISLATION: AB 2054 (TORL.AKSON) SPECIFIC REOUEST(S)OR RECOMMENDATION(S)&BACKGROUND AND JUSTIFICATION RECOMMENDATION: AGREE to CO-SPONSOR AB 2054 by Assemblyman Tom Torlakson,which would establish a state pilot project on an inter-regional basis to improve the balance of jobs and housing. BACKGROUND: The Board's 2000 Legislative Program includes the following item: "16. Continue to support efforts to encourage inter-regional land use planning (among,for example, San Joaquin Valley and Bay Area counties)." Assemblyman Torlakson has introduced AB 2054 at the request of the Inter- Regional Partnership on which Supervisor DeSaulnier serves and which includes elected officials from Alameda, Contra Costa, Santa Clara, San Joaquin and Stanislaus counties. As introduced, AB 2054 creates a pilot project in the five county area. The pilot project would allow the Inter-Regional Partnership to identify five to ten sites where either jobs or housing can be located in an effort to better balance the location of CONTINUED ON ATTACHMENT: —YES SIGNATURE, RECOMMENDATION OF COUNTY ADMINISTRATOR RECOMMENDATION OF BOARD COMMITTEE APPROVE OTHER SIGNATURE(S), ACTION OF BOARD ON , zvvv APPROVED AS RECOMMENDED XX OTHER VOTE OF SUPERVISORS 1 HEREBY CERTIFY THAT THIS IS A TRUE xx UNANIMOUS(ABSENT — ) AND CORRECT COPY OF AN ACTION TAKEN AYES- NOES: AND ENTERED ON THE MINUTES OF THE BOARD ASSENT: ABSTAIN: OF SUPERVISORS ON THE DATE SHOWN. See Page 2 ATTESTED March 210 200Q Contact � PHIL BATCHELOR,CLERK OF THE BOARD OF cc: SUPERVISORS AND COUNTY ADMINISTRATOR BY DEPUTY jobs and housing in the five county area. The bill also provides for a research, public input, development and implementation process. The bill also allows the Inter-Regional Partnership to propose various incentives that might include tax credits, a return of property tax from the State, CEQA streamlining, loans, pooling of redevelopment funds, tax-increment financing, and transfers of development rights. The goals of the pilot project are identified as: • encourage economic investment, including job creation, near available housing. • encourage housing to be located near major employment center as well as directed at business parks. • encourage development along corridors served by transit and near transit stations. • encourage more sustainable and effective transportation between job and housing centers. The bill also provides for an independent evaluation of the pilot project. In view of the fact that AB 2054 is consistent with an element of the Board's 2000 Legislative Program, it is recommended that the Board agree to co-sponsor AB 2054. cc: County Administrator Supervisor DeSaulnier Community Development Director Assemblyman Tom Torlakson Room 2003 State Capitol Sacramento, CA 95814 Les Spahnn: Heim, Noack, Felly & Spahnn 1121 L Street, Suite 100 Sacramento, CA 95814 -2- CALIFORNIA LEGISLATURE-19992040 REGULAR SESSION ASSEMBLY BILI., ' No. 2054 Introduced by Assembly Member Torlakson February 22, 2000 An act to add and repeal Article 2.10 (commencing with Section 65891) of Chapter 4 of Division 1 of Title 7 of the Government Code, relating to a jobs—housing balance. LEGISLATIVE COUNSELS DIGEST AB 2054, as introduced, Torlakson. Inter-Regional Partnership State Pilot Project to Improve the Balance of Jobs and Housing. Existing law requires the Department of Housing and Community Development to prepare a guidebook for use by governmental agencies in planning and developing a housing supply to meet the need created by employment growth. This bill would create the Inter-Regional Partnership (IRP) State Pilot Project to Improve the Balance of Jobs and Housing, which would be monitored by the Office of Planning and Research, to test and evaluate policies and incentives, as specified, to mitigate current and future imbalances of jobs and housing in specified counties. The bill would make these provisions inoperative on July 31, 2004, and would repeal them as of January 1, 2005. Vote: majority. Appropriation: no. Fiscal committee: yes. State-mandated local program: no. 99 ,F. AB 2054 —2— The 2The people of the State of California do enact as follows: 1 SECTION 1. Article 2.10 (commencing with Section 2 65891) is added to Chapter 4 of Division 1 of Title 7 of the 3 Government Code, to read: 4 5 Article 2.10. Inter-Regional Partnership (IRP) State 6 Pilot Project to Improve the Balance of Jobs and 7 Housing 8 9 65891. This article may be cited and shall be known as 10 the Inter-Regional Partnership (IRP) State Pilot Project 11 to Improve the Balance of Jobs and Housing. 12 65891.1. For the purposes of this article, the following 13 terms have the following meanings: 14 (a) "Inter-Regional Partnership„ or "IRP" means an 15 organization of elected officials from the Counties of 16 Alameda, Contra Costa, Santa Clara, San Joaquin, and 17 Stanislaus and a number of cities therein, that was formed 18 under the sponsorship of the three regional councils of 19 government, the Association of Bay Area Governments 20 (ABAG), the San Joaquin Council of Governments, and 21 the Stanislaus Council of Government, that oversee 22 regional land use and transportation planning for the five 23 counties. 24 (b) "Incentives" include, subject to negotiations with 25 appropriate public state and local agencies, the following: 26 (1) Providing tax credit priority for development of 27 multifamily residential construction in areas with job 28 surpluses and for job generating projects in areas with 29 housing surpluses. 30 (2) Providing a return of state property tax for 31 development of affordable housing in areas with job 32 surpluses and for job generating projects in areas with 33 housing surpluses. 34 (3) Streamlining under the California Environmental 35 Quality Act (Division 13 (commencing with Section 36 21000) of the Public Resources Code) to facilitate desired 37 development in selected areas. 99 1 -3— AB 2054 1 (4) Providing loans for up-front planning and 2 environmental evaluation of sites to streamline 3 permitting time for projects meeting identified 4 guidelines. 5 (5) Pooling of redevelopment funds. 6 (6) Tax-increment financing for jobs-housing 7 opportunity sites based on the redevelopment model. 8 (7) Transfer of development rights (TDRs) used to 9 preserve agricultural lands and open space, and 10 encourage infill development and redevelopment. 11 (8) Providing a return of property tax from the state 12 on affordable housing projects built on sites with 13 inadequate housing stock. 14 (c) "Jobs-housing opportunity site" means a site 15 selected by the IRP State Pilot Project for the purpose of 16 mitigating current and future imbalances of jobs and 17 housing in the Counties of Alameda, Contra Costa, Santa 18 Clara, San Joaquin, and Stanislaus that has the following 19 characteristics: 20 (1) Is no smaller than 50 acres and no larger than 250 21 acres. 22 (2) Contains significant portions of land that are 23 vacant, underutilized, and suitable for urban use. 24 (3) Is created for the purpose of either providing 25 needed work force housing if there is a surplus of jobs or 26 providing jobs for the area's workers if there is a surplus 27 of housing. 28 (4) Is eligible to receive incentives, subject to 29 negotiation with appropriate resource agencies. 30 65891.2. It is the intent of the Legislature to establish 31 the Inter-Regional Partnership (IRP) as a 32 state-supported pilot project to test and evaluate a variety 33 of policies and incentives designed to mitigate current 34 and future imbalances of jobs and housing in the Counties 35 of Alameda, Contra Costa, Santa Clara, San Joaquin, and 36 Stanislaus. 37 65891.3. The Legislature finds and declares all of the 38 following: 39 (a) California will experience significant population 40 growth in the coming decades. In the bay area, one 99 I AB 2054 —4- 1 4-- 1 million new residents are forecast by the year 2020. An 2 equal number of new jobs are expected during the same 3 time period. However, less than 500,000 new housing 4 units are expected to be built in an already costly and 5 competitive housing market. 6 (b) Many central valley communities expect to double 7 or triple in size, but most of them will not attract 8 equivalent numbers of new jobs. Instead, thousands of 9 central valley residents are expected to commute far into 10 the bay area, often driving two hours or more each way. 11 The challenges to transportation, air quality, and social 12 quality of life are enormous. Projections estimate the 13 current number of less than 100,000 daily Altamont Pass 14 commuters will more than double to 250,000 by the year 15 2020. 16 (c) These growth-related issues cut across county and 17 regional boundaries. The Inter-Regional Partnership is 18 intended to provide a forum for neighboring jurisdictions 19 governed by different regional councils of government to 20 deal collaboratively with land use, transportation, and air 21 quality issues that affect a five-county region. 22 (d) The IRP State Pilot Project will stand as an 23 important example for other regions in the state in 24 dealing with multijurisdictional problem solving and 25 addressing land use planning across metropolitan 26 borders. 27 (e) The need for communication and cooperation 28 among these jurisdictions is underscored by the fact that 29 Alameda County recently sued the City of Tracy in San 30 Joaquin County concerning the environmental impacts 31 of a planned housing development on the western edge 32 of the county where a majority of residents would be 33 assumed to commute into the bay area through Alameda 34 County. 35 (f) These interjurisdictional planning issues are not 36 unique to the IRP's five-county area; several other 37 expanding metropolitan areas in California are beginning 38 to experience similar problems. However, the geographic 39 imbalance in housing and job growth in the IRP area is 40 among the country's most extreme examples, and, driven 99 .r —5— AB 2054 1 by continued employment growth in the Silicon Valley, 2 is predicted to worsen significantly in the coming years. 3 (g) The housing market in the Silicon Valley is now the 4 most expensive in the nation. Land being developed for 5 housing in the San Joaquin Valley is some of the highest 6 quality agricultural land in the world. 7 (h) The IRP area is the best place in the state, and 8 probably one of the best in the country, to implement a 9 pilot program designed to mitigate the myriad of 10 problems associated with unbalanced and uncoordinated 11 growth. 12 (i) By implementing this pilot program, the state will 13 play an important role in creating a more sustainable 14 future pattern of land use in the IRP area. 15 0) Active investment of state resources now in the 16 interregional balancing of jobs and housing opportunities 17 will reduce the need for costly transportation 18 infrastructure investments in the future. 19 (k) The current path of land development in the 20 five-county area will have very costly transportation and 21 environmental impacts if efforts are not made soon to link 22 job growth to housing production. 23 65891.4. (a) The Inter-Regional Partnership (IRP) 24 State Pilot Project to Improve the Balance of Jobs and 25 Dousing is hereby established. 26 (b) The Governor's Office of Planning and Research 27 shall be the state agency responsible for monitoring the 28 IRP State Pilot Project. 29 (c) The pilot project shall consist of two phases: (1) 30 research and development, as specified in Sections 31 65891.5 and 65891.6, and (2) implementation, as specified 32 in Section 65891.7. 33 65891.5. During the first year after the date that 34 funding is received, the IRP shall complete all the 35 necessary research, outreach, and negotiation to allow 36 the successful establishment of jobs-housing opportunity 37 sites throughout the five IRP counties. At the end of this 38 phase a series of outreach meetings shall be held with 39 local jurisdictions and the public to present the data and 40 recommendations for locations of jobs-housing 99 G Y2 AB 2054 —6- 1 d_...1 opportunity sites. Local jurisdictions wishing to 2 participate in the pilot project shall enter into 3 agreements with the IRP to pursue the regional goals and 4 objectives of opportunity sites within their jurisdictions. 5 65891.6. (a) The first phase shall provide all of the 6 following: 7 (1) An integrated Geographic Information System 8 (GIS) enabling easy comparison of data on land use and 9 transportation trends and alternative scenarios across the 10 five-county area. The GIS mapping shall focus on 11 obtaining existing data from a variety of sources, and 12 integrating them into a single system to allow accurate 13 analysis and scenario work on an interregional scale. The 14 Legislature finds and declares that the IRP's GIS system 15 will be a crucial tool for use in determining the location 16 of proposed jobs-housing opportunity sites. 17 (2) General types of data to be assembled in the GIS 18 system shall 'include: 19 (A) Demographic data, including population and 20 employment by census tract. 21 (B) Projected growth data consisting of information 22 on where growth, including jobs generation and new 23 housing location, is predicted to occur over a 20-year 24 period. 25 (C) Transportation information such as traffic 26 capacity and usage, transit access and usage, and 27 journey-to-work data. 28 (D) Land use information, including general plan 29 layers and zoning designations. It is the intent of the 30 Legislature that to reduce costs and setup time, the IkP's 31 GIS undertaking shall not include parcel-level data. 32 (E) Basic environmental data, including floodplains, 33 slopes, and contamination. 34 (3) A refined description of the incentive program for 35 application to the jobs-housing opportunity sites within 36 the IRP counties. This list shall include thorough 37 descriptions of fiscal and nonfiscal incentives. A variety of 38 state departments shall be involved in determining what 39 incentives might be made available, including, but not 40 limited to, the Office of Planning and Research, the 99 n s .l —7— AB 2054 1 Department of Housing and Community Development, 2 the California Housing Finance Agency, the Department 3 of Transportation, and the Department of Conservation. 4 (4) Recommendations for establishing 5 to 10 official 5 Inter-Regional Partnership Jobs-Housing Opportunity 6 Sites located throughout the five-county area. Using the 7 GIS system and meeting with local jurisdictions, the IRP 8 shall propose a series of jobs-housing opportunity sites. 9 Each site shall have specific goals and a description of the 10 type of action desired to attain these goals, including 11 recommended state sponsored incentives intended to 12 encourage the desired results. The types of incentives 13 requested may vary by site location and type. Sites 14 located near, or with good transit access to, existing major 15 employment centers may receive incentives designed to 16 promote reasonably priced housing development. Sites 17 located far from existing employment centers, but near, 18 or with good transit access to, significant work force 19 housing supply, may receive incentives designed to 20 promote employment development. 21 65891.7. (a) During the second year of the pilot 22 project, opportunity sites shall be established. 23 Negotiation between the state, the IRP, and local 24 jurisdictions shall result in formal agreements to 25 implement specific jobs-housing opportunity sites. 26 (b) Results of the second phase shall include. 27 (1) Final selection of not less than 5 nor more than 10 28 official IRP Jobs-Housing Opportunity Sites that shall be 29 equitably distributed among each of the five IRP 30 counties. 31 (2) Reports that include results of GIS analysis and 32 clearly illustrate the benefits of prescribed developments 33 toward creating an interregional jobs-housing balance. 34 Desired outcomes and actions for each site shall be 35 included in the report. 36 (3) Memoranda of understanding to be adopted 37 between local jurisdictions with selected sites for the pilot 38 program, the IRP, and the appropriate state agencies, 39 outlining outcomes and incentives to be awarded for 40 stated outcomes. 99 AB 2054 —8- 1 8- 1 65891.8. (a) The goals of the IRP and the pilot project 2 are to: 3 (1) Encourage economic investment, including job 4 creation, near available housing. 5 (2) Encourage housing to be located near major 6 employment centers. 7 (3) Encourage development along corridors served by 8 transit and near transit stations. 9 (4) Encourage more sustainable and effective 10 transportation between job and housing centers. 11 (b) The IRP shall contract with a qualified consultant 12 to conduct an evaluation of the pilot project. Ongoing 13 monitoring and evaluation shall be conducted 14 throughout the implementation of phases one and two. 15 After sites have been selected and projects begin on each 16 of the sites, the progress of each project shall be 17 evaluated. The evaluation shall assess differences in 18 traffic and commuter patterns, using the GIS system as a 19 measuring device. A final report shall be submitted by the 20 IRP to the Office of Planning and Research on or before 21 July 31, 2004. 22 65891.9. Funding for the IRP State Pilot Project shall 23 be provided in the 2000-01 Budget Act. The IRP State 24 Pilot Project shall begin on January 1, 2001. 25 65891.10. This article shall become inoperative on July 26 31, 2004, and, as of January 1, 2005, is repealed, unless a 27 later enacted statute that is enacted before January 1, 28 2005, deletes or extends the dates on which it becomes 29 inoperative and is repealed. O 99 TO. BOARD OF SUPERVISORS Contra L . FROM: PHIL BATCHELOR, COUNTY ADMINISTRATORCosta s County March 15, 2000 4: ©ATE: Ftr SUBJECT. LEGISLATION: FUNDING FOR PROBATION CHALLENGE GRANTS SPECIFIC REQUEST(S)OR RECOMMENDATION(S)&BACKGROUND AND JUSTIFICATION RECOMMENDATION: ADOPT a position in SUPPORT of maintaining in the 2000-2001 State budget funding for Challenge Grant I and Challenge Grant 11 at sufficient levels to maintain the grants which Contra Costa County is currently receiving. BACKGROUND: Contra Costa County receives a grant from the State which is termed Challenge Grant 1. Under this grant, the Probation Department is able to place nine deputy probation officers on high school campuses. Six of the positions are a result of the state grant funds; the other three positions are a part of the required match. The County receives $827,515 annually for this grant. Without these funds it would not be possible to keep the probation officers on the high school campuses. As a result of having these officers on campus the number of incidents has been reduced. The officers are seen as an important diversion and early intervention resource. Under Challenge Grant 11,the County receives$1,052,809. This money, along with a required match, funds three community-based counseling programs for young women in East, Central and West county. These counseling programs help fill a void which had existed in the Probation Department's continuum of care for young women in the community. CONTINUED ON ATTACHMENT: YES SIGNATURE: RECOMMENDATION OF COUNTY ADMINISTRATOR —RECOMMENDATION OF BOARD COMMITTEE APPROVE OTHER SIGNATURE(S): ACTION OF BOARD ON , avuv APPROVED AS RECOMMENDED XL_ 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. County Administrator ATTESTED March 21 - 2000 Contact: County Probation Officer PHIL BATCHELOR,CLERK OF THE BOARD OF ccs SUPERVISORS AND COUNTY ADMINISTRATOR Les Spahnn; Heim, Noack, Kelly &Spahnn 1121 L Street, Suite 100 Sacramento, CA 95814 B4P DEPUTY 5r`vd Fourth year funding in the State Budget is essential if these valuable programs are going to be continued. The County Probation Officer has asked that the Board of Supervisors add support for continued funding for Challenge Grant I and II to its Legislative Program and ask the County's lobbyist to advocate for continued funding for these programs in the 2000-2001 State Budget. -2- Probation Department Contra Steven L.Bautista County Probation Officer Administrative Offices Costa 50 Douglas Drive Suite 201 Court/ Martinez, California 94553-8500 `�� .,.,... (925) 313-4180CONTRA COSTA COUNT` (925) 313-41911FAX - `_ MAR 7 March 6, 2000 { Claude Van Marter Asst. County Administrator 651 Pine Street, 11th Floor Martinez, CA 94553 RE: Challenge Grants I &II Dear Claude: I am requesting that you prepare a request for the Board of Supervisors to authorize you to draft a letter to our lobbyist requesting support for fourth year Challenge Grant funding for both Grants I and II. Under Challenge Grant I we have been able to place nine deputy probation officers on high school campuses throughout our County. Six of these probation officers were funded through grant funds and three were part of the mandatory match. Additionally, one supervisor was funded through grant funds to oversee this program. Since the inception of this program we have found a reduction in the number of incidences on these high school campuses. These positions have been very useful to the schools and we believe that they are essential diversion and early intervention programs. The amount of funding we received for Challenge Grant I totals $627,515 annually. The County provides a$199,980 match for a total program cost annually of$827,495. We fear loss of this funding would prevent the continued operation of this program and thereby result in the increased referrals to the Probation Department as well as the juvenile justice system. Challenge Grant II is a unique program which provides three community based counseling programs in the eastern, central and western portion of our County. Annually the Challenge Grant II program receives $1,052,609 and has a match composed of various resources totaling Claude Van Marter March 6, 2000 Page 2 $1,066,311. The annual operating cost of this program totals $2,118,920. These programs provide services to young ladies throughout our County and help fill a void that had previously existed in the continuum of care for young women in our community. As you can see,the funding of these programs is essential for their continued operation. 1 am, therefore,requesting that you proceed in your efforts to secure additional funding for the fourth year of these programs. Thank you for your efforts in this matter. Very truly yours, Steven L. Bautista County Probation Officer SLB:ds S1/c1114thM