Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAboutCC AG PKT 2007-06-25 #N e e e AGENDA REPORT DATE: June 25, 2007 TO: Honorable Mayor and City Council THRU: David N. Carmany, City Manager FROM: Mark K. Vukojevic, P .E., Director of Public Works/City Engineer SUBJECT: RESOLUTION TO SUPPORT SB 286 FOR PROPOSITION IB LOCAL STREETS AND ROADS FUNDS SUMMARY OF REQUEST: The proposed City Council action will adopt the attached resolution in support of SB 286 for $1 Billion to cities from Proposition IB Local Streets and Roads funds. BACKGROUND: The State Budget Conference Committee is currently in deliberation on how much of the Proposition IB - $2 Billion Local Streets and Roads funds to allocate to cities and counties in 2007-08. Presently, there are varying funding levels and projected funding release dates in the different Assembly, Senate and Administration budget proposals. The League of California Cities and California State Association of Counties (CSAC) have brought forth a proposal through SB 286 (LowenthallDutton) that defines an allocation schedule for the $2 billion for cities and counties. This bill guarantees that every city will receive at least half of their Proposition IB funds to spend in the next two fiscal years (the 2007-08 Prop. 42 "gap" year and 2008-09). Securing this funding is extremely important for cities. Cities will not receive any money for local streets and roads during the 2007.08 Prop. 42 "gap" year. Cities can use these Prop. IB funds immediately for traffic congestion relief, transit, traffic safety, storm damage, maintenance, construction and other projects to i~prove the local transportation system. SB 286 also provides accountability and safeguards to ensure bond funds are spent expeditiously. The League and CSAC recognize that the state does not want to issue bond debt if the funds are not being spent. SB 286 includes a provision that requires cities and counties to expend funds within three years of allocation or return them to the State Controller for reallocation to other cities and counties. In contrast, the Governor's Budget allocates Prop IB funding at $300 million for cities and another,$300 million for counties. Funding in future budget years is projected at $300 million split evenly between cities and counties for 2008-09 and $150 million per year for cities and counties until $2 billion is reached. -1- Agenda ItemY e e e The Assembly version mirrors the Governor's proposal for 2007-08 allocation at $600 million split evenly between cities and counties. The Senate has proposed $400 million for 2007-08 to be allocated $200 million for cities and $200 million for counties. The League is asking for cities to pass a resolution in support ofSB 286 and full funding of Prop IB Local Streets and Roads for the fOllowing reasons: · Voters who Dassed ProD. IB ($19.9 billion transoortation bond) in November 2006 were Dromised $2 billion would be used to imDrove local streets. roads and other Drioritv local transoortation Droiects. Voters want and deserve to see immediate results. · Cities are "readv-to-IZO" and earlv allocation means the exDenditure of funds for local oroiects can immediatelv Eet underwav. Untimely or inadequate Prop.1B funding allocation would unnecessarily cause project delays and limit the construction of many mid- and large-sized proj ects that are otherwise ready to go. · ProD. IB funds will allow oroiects aIreadv underwav to continue without interruDtion. This is especially important because cities will not receive any Prop. 42 (gasoline sales tax) funds for local streets and roads during the 2007-08 year. · The State can keen faith with voters by demonstrating that the State and local governments are making good on their promise to use bond limning responsibly and efficiently. Additionally, SB 286 (Lowenthal and Dutton) sets forth specific accountability, transparency and deliverability requirements to ensure public funds are spent responsibly and on projects the voters were promised. The City Manager's Office and Public Works Department support this proposal as it allows the City to quickly invest street dollars into the City. Public Works Staffis currently out to bid with the FY 07/08 local street rehabilitation project. With additional funding, the next high priority streets as listed in the Pavement Management Report can added to the project or Staff can create a second project within the fiscal year. FISCAL IMPACT: Funding of $1 Billion to cities from Proposition IB would provide Seal Beach with an estimated $812,655 instead of the previously expected $243,800 if only $300 Million were available to cities. RECOMMENDATION: It is recommended that the City Council adopt the attached resolution in support of SB 286 for $1 Billion to cities from Proposition IB Local Streets and Roads funds. Prepared By: ~,.I~ Mark K.Yukojevic, P.E. Director of Public Works/City Engineer -2- Agemla ltem_ e e e NOTED AND APPROVED: ~~ 1 David Carmany, City Manager Attachment: Resolution supporting SB 286 for $1 Billion to cities from Proposition IB League of Cities information flyer -3- Agenda ltem_ e RESOLUTION NUMBER_ A RESOLUfiON OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF SEAL BEACH SUPPORTING $1 BILUON STATE BUDGET ALWCA T10N OF PROP lB FUND TO CITIES IN 2007.2008 WHEREAS, the voton of California paa.ed Propo.ition IB ($19,9 billion tranaportalion bond) in November 2006, and w.... promilled $2 billlon would be ulled 10 improve local .treeta, roads and other priority looaltran.portation projects: and WHEREAS, California'. citi.. are ready to go 10 begin work on local traffio .arety repaira, conge.tion relief, fixing crumbling roada. improving maa. tran.i1 and other local tran.portaIion improvement projects; and WHEREAS, aocording 10 a Leaguo of California cm.. aurvey, citi.. havo numeroua local projoots tha10an put the city .hare of the $1 billion in local .tree1 and road monoy. to use right away for the benefit of citizens and businesses; and WHEREAS, oitie. need sufficient Prop. IB funds allocated this year 10 begin work on local tranlportation projoots thOl are ready 10 go. Early allocation or these funds will allow projeotslO get underway immedi"",ly and will proven1 unn....ssary delays: and WHEREAS, .ome Prop. IB projects willlako YO"" or even decade. 10 complete, many city tran.porta1ion improvemen1 projects are ready 10 get off the drawinS board and into construction right away, domonstra1ing 10 voter. 1hOl the .1"'" and looal governmenll are making good on their promise 10 spend bond funds in a timely and responsible manner; and e WHEREAS, local .troeIs and roads are a critical cornponentlO a seaml... transportation notwork. the mobili1y of California ....idents. the transport or goods and services. and tho strength of our economy; and WHEREAS, citi.. will not roc:eive any Prop, 42 (gaaoline .al..llx) funds for looal stroela and roads during the 2007-08 year and Prop, IB funds will allow projoe18 already underway to continue without intemJption; and WHEREAS, an untimely or inadequate allocalion of Prop, IB funding thil year would unnecessariJy cause project delays of up to one year and limit the construction of many mid- and large-sized projoc:ta that are otherwise ready 10 go: NOW, TIlEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED that we h....by urge the legi.lature and governor to appropriate $1 Billion in Prop, IB Funds out of tho 2007-08 Slate Budget 10 fund vital Jocal street and road repain in California cities. PASSED, APPROVED AND ADOPI'ED by the City Councilor Seal Boach. a1 a meeting hereof held on 1he 25th dsy of June . 2007 by the following vote: AYES: COUNCn.MEMBERS NOES: COUNCILMEMBERS ABSENT: COUNClLMEMBERS ABSTAIN: COUNClLMEMBERS e Mayor e A TrEST: City Clerk STATBOFCALIFORNIA } COUNTY OF ORANGE } SS CITY OF SEAL BEACH } I, LInda Dovino, Ci1y Clerk for tho City of SoaI Bo""", Caliromia, do horoby certify thl! tho forosoing resolution. i. tho original copy of Rosolution Numbor_ on filo in tho offi.. of tho Ci1y Clerk, pusod, approvod and adopb:d by the City Council of the City of Soal Bo""" I! . "'gular mooting horoof hold on tho 25th day of Juno. 2007. Ci1y Clerk e e e e e ~ ~r~~~U~I~ CrTI ES Hmlfl~ California's Cities w;' Read'"'o G11!! .r..' . ~~ ',_ 10 ':.J::; "1'\ OUI' I.u("itl _ 'tn'f.tl'O ,Hul .. , ""- .. Cities Are Readv m Go to Fix Our Local Streets and Roads. We Urge State Lawmakers to Appropriate $1 BIllion from Prop. 1 B this Year to Fund City Transportation Projects. · Votars who passed Prop. 1 B ($19.9 billion transportation bond) In November 2006 were promised $2 billion would be used to improve local streets, roads and other priority local transportation projects, Votars want end deserve to see Immediate results. · California's cities need access to these funds to begin war!< on local trallic safety repairs, congestion relief, IIxlng crumbling roads, mass transit and other local transportation Improvement projects. · According to a survey conducted by the League of Califomla Cities, cities have identified numerous local proJects that can put these funds 10 use right rrway for the benefit of citizens and businesses. · California's cities are requesting $1 billion In Proposition 1 B funds be allocated this budget year to financa city transportation projects. Eariy allocation means the expenditure of funds for local projects can get underway Immediately. Keep Faith with Voters. Show Eariy Progress on Local Transportation Improvements. · Every bip begins and ends on local streets and roads - they are a critical component to a seamless transportation nelwolk, the mobility of California residents, the transport of goods and servicas, and the strength of our economy. · While other Prop. 1 B projects will take years or even decades to complete, many city transportation improvement projects are ready to get off the drewlng board and Into construction right away. · The State can keep faith with voters by allocating $1 billion dollars out of Prop. 1 B funds to California's cities this year - enabling cities to get to wor!< on local transportation Improvement projects and demonstrating to voters that the State end local governments are making good on their promise to use bond funding responsibly and efficiently. Support SB 286 - Ensure a Reliable Funding Source for Local Transportation Improvement Projects and Provide Accountability, Dellverability and Transparency. · SB 286 (Lowenthal and Dutton) sets forth speclftc accountability requirements to ensure public funds are spent responsibly and on projects the voters were promised. · SB 286 also includes a provision that requires bond funds to be spent within three-years to ansure that the publiC sees the benellts of these projects sooner rather than latar. Failure to Provide Adequate Funding Now Will Leave Cities Well Short of What's Needed to Get the Job Done. · Cities will not receive any Prop. 42 (gasolIne salas tax) funds for local streets and roads during the 2007-08 year. Prop. 1 B funds will allow projects already underway to continue without Interruption. · What's more, cities are currently devising their own local bUdgets right now -Including funding for local transportation projects that should be bolstared by Prop. 1 B funds. · Untimely or Inadequata Prop. 1 B funding allocation would unnecessarily cause project delays of up to one year and limit the construction of many mid- and large-sized projects that are otherwise ready to go.