Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAboutCC AG PKT 2002-10-14 #H AGENDA REPORT DATE: October 14, 2002 TO: Honorable Mayor and City Council THRU: John B. Bahorski, City Manager FROM: Douglas A. Dancs, P.E., Director of Public Works / City Engineer SUBJECT: GRANT APPLICATIONS - STATUS REPORT SUMMARY The proposed City Council action will receive and file the presented information for the processing of grant applications. BACKGROUND: Grant programs originate from Federal, State, County and local agencies for the competitive disbursement of funds for a variety of projects. The City of Seal Beach has been a long -time competitor for these funds and has been successful in securing grants and implementing projects. Grant funding programs and procedures are specific and are usually geared towards specific project types. In other words, grant monies usually can not be deposited in or spent as general fund monies. In addition, grants are usually not provided for operational type projects or projects which cities are obligated to maintain such as pump stations. In the recent years, the City has aggressively pursued and been successful with several types of grants programs for the construction of specific projects. In fact, 89% of the $21 million Capital Improvement Program is funded by outside funding sources. These include numerous Federal, State, and County programs for street and bridge projects, County Community Block grants, State Water Resources Control Board grants, Environmental Protection Agency grants, and the Department of Forestry grants to name a few. A large portion of these are secured through competitive grants in which the City of Seal Beach is selected over other agencies. Portions of the various funding sources are distributed on a per- capita basis. Most recently, the City has been the recipient of County of Orange grants for water quality improvement projects ($86k), CA Coastal Conservancy ($300k), CA Dept. of Boating and Waterways ($800k), and grants from the Orange County Sanitation District ($850k) for sewer improvement projects. Several others have been secured. However, each one of these projects requires a City funding match ranging from 20% to 50 %° and extensive Staff time (2 to 3 times greater than a general fund project) to administer the bureaucratic qualification and reimbursement process. In some cases, Staff may spend more time than the value of the grant. Environmental sensitivity has increased in the recent decades which has brought a variety of programs available to public agencies and non - governmental organizations (NGO). In 2000, Agenda Item • California voters passed Proposition 12, the Safe Neighborhood Parks, Clean Water, Clean Air and Coastal Protection Bond Act of 2000 ($2.1 billion) and Proposition 13, the Safe Drinking Water, Clean Water, Watershed Protection and Flood Protection Bond Act ($1.97 billion). In 2002, California voters passed Proposition 40, the Safe Neighborhood Parks, Clean Water, Clean Air and Coastal Protection Bond Act of 2002 ($2.6 billion). Each of these grants are specifically distributed to a variety of state agencies per the original language of the proposition such as State Water Resources Control Board ( SWRCB), the State Department of Parks, and State Coastal Conservancy to name a few. These agencies along with the State legislature develop the grant applications, award the grant funds, and administer the grant monies. Regularly, the money is distributed to the local agencies and counties on a per - capita basis. It should be noted, that the notification of fund programs may take six months to several years for the state agencies to develop and administer. As part of the Proposition 12 bond, the City has been allocated $248,000 for City parks under the Park Per Capita Program and $79,799 under the Roberti - Z'Berg -Harris Block grant program allocations. These funds have been programmed in the Capital Improvement Program for the replacement of playground equipment at four parks including Marina Park, the Beach Park, Heather Park and Edison Park. In addition, they will provide miscellaneous improvements to the Marina Community Center, McGaugh pool, and irrigation repairs to the parks. (Currently, the playground replacement project is scheduled for completion in November of 2002). Other completed Prop. 12 projects include Almond Park playground replacement and trees at various locations. In addition, the City has formally identified over $4 million in projects to the Rivers and Mountains Conservancy (RMC) for San Gabriel River trail improvements, beach improvements and wetland restoration. Formal grant proposals to the RMC will be submitted when the program guidelines are formalized. The City has applied for over $6 million in Prop. 12 grant projects for trees, parks, recreational trails, and beach projects. As part of the Proposition 13 bond, the City aggressively applied for over $8 million of grant funds from the State Water Resources Control Board for debris booms, sewer safety improvements and rehabilitation, urban run -off diversions, and wetland restoration. Two of these projects were put on the top -10 priority list for Orange County and most recently when the list was further reduced, it was reduced to one project. In October, it is anticipated the SWRCB will approve a $1.1 million grant to the City of Seal Beach for the restoration of wetlands for the improvement of water quality in the Hellman Property. Several watershed agencies have or will be receiving funds which will implement projects, studies, and task forces to improve water quality in the Seal Beach area. Staff will work closely with those agencies. Phase 2 of the request for grant applications is expected at the beginning of the year. The distribution of Proposition 40 bond funds approved in March of 2002 is in the process of being determined. It is anticipated that the City will receive $220,000 in Parks Per Capita funds and $79,779 in Roberti - Z'Berg -Harris Block grant program allocations. In addition, the City has identified several otheA projects which may qualify and these have been submitted to the SWRCB — Clean Beaches Initiative and to the Rivers and Mountains Conservancy. These grant Agenda Item requests total more than $10 million in upgrades to the San Gabriel River Trail, the beach parking lot and facilities, City facilities, urban forests, Hellman wetlands, urban run -off diversions, debris booms and sewer system upgrades and repairs. In the upcoming months, additional specific program guidelines will become available for the City to pursue. New grant programs for a variety of projects become available constantly. The City has secured millions of dollars in grant funding and continues to pursue millions of dollars of additional funding. When the guidelines are applicable towards City needs and projects, the City pursues these grants and submits applications. If the City is a recipient of a grant, the monies become incorporated in the City's Capital Improvement Program. The City's in -house Geographical Information System (GIS) has been a crucial component in providing mapping and documentation for grant applications. At this time, all grant writing and administration is done by Staff. A break down of the funding distribution from the each proposition has been attached. FISCAL IMPACT: There are no fund impacts associated with the presented information. However, it should be noted that several grant programs require up to a 50% match from City funds which will require City Council approval once the City is notified. It is anticipated that a match of $220,000 in unbudgeted general fund monies will be required for the wetlands restoration project. In addition, the Roberti - Z'Berg -Harris Block grant program of 2000 and 2002 will require a combined total match of $60,000 from unbudgeted general fund monies. Staff time associated with grants which require 2 to 3 times more time than general fund projects are generally not reimbursable. RECOMMENDATION: The proposed City Council action will receive and file the presented information for the processing of grant applications. Prepared By: Reviewed B 0144_fdr-=-=-- _A _„,:_„::_____ _ ......__ M K. Vukojevic, P.E. D oug Dancs, P.E., Director, Deputy City Engineer Public Works Department • NOT _ D A 4 APPROV 4 : • • 0 , r � �1 r/ Joh Bahor - City Manager 1 / Agenda Item Proposition 12 Use of Bond Funds Under Proposition 12 (In Millions) Grants to Local Governments and Nonprofit Groups To fund recreational areas, with grant amount based on population of the local area $388.0 (such as a city, county, or park district). r � For recreational areas primarily in urban areas, as follows: 200.0 • Urban areas - -$138 million. • Large urban areas (cities over 300,000 population and county or park districts over 1,000,000 population) - -$28 million. • Either urban or rural areas based on need -- $34 million. ` r To local agencies for various recreational, cultural, and natural areas. 102.5 For recreational areas, youth centers, and environmental improvement projects E 100.0 benefitting youth in areas of significant poverty. F or recreational and cultural areas (including zoos and aquariums) in urban areas. 71.5 For farmland protection. 25.0 For soccer and baseball facilities to nonprofit groups that serve disadvantaged youth. 15.0 f 3 To San Francisco for improvements at Golden Gate Park. 15.0 I For urban forestry programs. 10.0 For playground accessibility improvements using recycled materials. 7.0 To Alameda County for Camp Arroyo. — — 2.0 For conservation, water recycling, and recreation in Sonoma County. 2.0 I For community centers in Galt, Gilroy, and San Benito County. 1.0 For a wild animal rehabilitation center in the San Bernardino Mountains. 1.0 I Total, Grants to Local Governments and Nonprofit Groups $940.0 I State Projects To buy, improve, or renovate recreational areas. $525.0 To acquire and preserve natural areas. 355.0 [To acquire and preserve fish and wildlife habitat. J 277.5 To pay the California Conservation Corps for work on projects funded by this 2.5 proposition. Total, State Projects $1,160.0 1 Total, All Bond Funds - -- $2,100.0 • • Proposition 13 Figure 1 Safe Drinking Water, Clean Water, Watershed Protection, And Flood Protection Act Uses of Bond Funds (In MlWons) Amount Safe Drinking Water Facilities $ 70 • Puolic water system capital improvernenls 70 Flood Protection S 292 • Flood control and fish and wildlife improvements on Yuba and Feather Rsvers 00 • LocaI hood control projects in specitied areas. including 13 ccouniies, the stele capitol area, and the Santa Crux region 72 • Land acquisition and rostorauon projects 70 • Delta levee rehabilitation 30 • Urban stream restoration 25 • Mapping 5 Watershed Protection $ 468 • Protection of the Santa An River and the Lake Elsinore and San Jacinto watersheds 250 • River parkway acquisition and riparian habitat restoration 95 • Development and implementation of local watershed management plans 90 • Protection and acquisition of coastal salmon habitat 25 • Water education institute. science censer, and science laboratory 8 Clean Water and Water Recycling S 355 • " Nonpoirtt source" pollution control 190 • wastewater treatment 100 • Water recycling 40 • Seawater intrusion control 25 Water Conservation S 155 • Water delivery system rehabilitation in economically disadvantaged areas 60 • Agricultural vrater conservation 35 • Urban water conservation 30 • Grouncwater recharge 30 Water Supply Reliability S 630 • Various projects in Bay -Delta to improve water quality, fish migration, and water lemls (CALFED projects) 250 • Groundwater storage 200 • Projects to improve water quality and supply in areas receiving delta water 1R0 Total S1,970 Proposition 40 Land, Air, and Water Conservation $1,275.0 • State conservancies acquisition, development, and restoration projects. $445.0 • Wildlife habitat acquisition and restoration projects. 300.0 • Water quality protection and restoration activities, including protection 300.0 of watersheds, coastal waters, beaches, rivers, and lakes. • Agricultural and grazing lands preservation. 75.0 • Urban river parkways and streams development, restoration, and 75.0 protection projects. • Grants for reducing air emissions from diesel - fueled equipment 50.0 operating within state and local parks. • Land and water resource protection and restoration through the 20.0 California Conservation Corps. • Urban forestry programs. 10.0 Parks and Recreation $1,057.5 • Urban parks and recreational facilities acquisition and development. $460.0 • Regional and local park acquisitions and development (funds 372.5 distributed based on population). • State park improvements and acquisitions. 225.0 Historical and Cultural Resources Preservation $267.5 • Acquisition, development, and preservation of culturally and/or $267.5 historically significant properties, structures, and artifacts. Total $2,600.0 ` i