Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAbout05/16/1990 BAKERSFIELD Patricia DeMond, Chair Lynn Edwards Patricia Smith Staff: Legislative: Trudy Thornton Litigation: Art Saalfield AGENDA LEGISLATIVE AND LITIGATION COMMITTEE Wednesday, May16, lggo 11:30 a.m. City Manager's Conference Room Legislative Items: 1. Proposition 111 and 108 Litigation Items: 1. Cavish vs. the City of Bakersfield amw am Leagu of California Cities. California Cities · CiTy MANAi3~:R.$ OFFICE: TO.' City Managers FROM: Don Benninghoven, Executive Director R~: Projects to be funded by Propositions 111 and 108 Please find enclosed the list of projects that are scheduled to be funded by the state and county portions of Propositions 111 and 108. We're forwarding them to you, by county, to enable you to inform members of the city council, employees and citizens about the impact these two very important ballot measures will have on cities. In addition, I'm attaching a list of actions that you may want to consider. We feel that Propositions 111 and 108 are two of the most important measures our voters will act on. Our goal is to ensure that all citizens are as fully informed about the impacts these measures will have on cities as possible. We're also publishing a weekly newsletter, called "Update," that is distributed with the "Legislative Bulletin." It includes a variety of information about what the two ballot measures will do and how they impact cities, as well as suggestions for informing citizens and employees. Should you have any questions about any of these items, please contact the League's Communications Director, Shed Erlewine, at 916/444-5790. CONFERENCE REGISTRATION OFFICE HEADQUARTERS SOUTHERN CALIFORNIA OFFICE BOX 7005, LAFAYETTE, CA 94549 '1400 K STREET, SACRAMENTO, CA 95814 4o4 HILTON CENTER OFFICE BLDG. (415) 283-2113 (91 6) 444-5790 9O0 WILSHIRE BOULEVARD LOS ANGELES, CA 90017 f213~ 629-142~ League of California Cities PROPOSITIONS 111 AND '108 Local Actions for Cities The following actions are those that may be taken by a city to educate citizens and employees about the impacts that Propositions 111 and 108 can have on the city. Care should be taken to ensure that cities not devote public resources to adyocating or opposing a ballot measure, but to informing. The city attorney should be consulted should questions arise, and the League's "Guide to City Participation in Ballot Measure Campaigns" is available. Should you have any questions about activities or this information, contact the League's Director of Communications at 916/444-5790. 1. Take a Position on the Measures - At an upcoming City Council meeting, the Council should vote to take a position on the measures (be sure to act on both measures). Documenting the impact they will have on the city, including which projects will be funded and the actual amount of revenues, will be important. Sample resolutions are available from the League office. 2. Issue a News Release - Notify the local news media of the city's stance on the measures..Again, be sure to document the impact. Sample releases and release formats are available from the League. 3. Editorials or Op-Ed Stories - Requesting a meeting with the editor of your local paper to discuss the measures could result in an editorial. A letter to the editor could be submitted to the paper as an op-ed piece. 4. Presentations at Service Clubs - You might consider making a speech at a local service club to talk about how important these measures are for cities. This is an ideal way to informally present news ideas to an important group of citizen and business leaders. Speeches of varying lengths are available. 5. Articles for .Local Publications - An article submitted to local newsletters, ex. chamber of commerce newsletter, sen/or citizens publications, recreation brochure, etc., would help to get the issues before citizens. 6. Employee Education Efforts - Be sure all city employees understand the measures and their impact. This can be done by distributing the League's fact sheet to all employees (possibly with paychecks) and ensuring that the weekly newsletter published by the League, called "Update," is distributed weekly to all employees. 7. Citizen newsletter articles - Citizen newsletters, bill inserts or other mailings to all citizens or to blocks of citizens could include a discussion of the ballot measures. KERN COUNTY Project Completion Delayed Indefinitely Unless Prop, 1'11 Passes (1988 STIP)' Route Description of Project 14/Midland Trail Convert to 4 lanes from Mojave to [unction of Route 395. 14/Midland Trail Roadway rehabilitation projects. .' .. 58 Roadway rehabilitation projects. 99 Widen from Ming Avenue to Route 204 178 Roadway rehabilitation projects. 178 Kern Canyon Road Add passing lane in canyon. 204 Union Avenue Improve interchange at Airport Drive. 395 Convert to 4 lanes from the junction of Route 14 to Inyo County line. 395 Roadway rehabilitation projects. Priorit~ Highway Projects Eligible For Prop, 111 Funds: .. Route Description of Project 14/Midland Trail Widen to 4 lanes from Mojave to 9.3 miles north. 14/Midland Trail. Widen to 4 lanes from north Of Redrock Canyon to south of junction of Rte 14/395. 14/Midland Trail Construct interchange at C_,,aJifomia City Blvd. 5 miles north of Mojave. 58 Construct Mojave Bypass. 58 Convert from 4-lane expressway to 4-lane freeway (10 mi west of and to Mojave). 58 Construct eastbound truck ctlmbing lanes west of Tehachapi. 99 Widen to 8 lanes through Bakersfield 178 Widen Kern River Canyon Highway to 4 lanes. 184 Weedpatch Highway Widen to 4 lanes Route 58 to Panama Road 184 Wheeler Ridge Road Widen to 4 lanes Route 223 to Panama Road. 395 Widen to 4 lanes from San Bemardino County line to the junction of Route 14/395. Priority Rail Transit Projects E]icjible For Props. 111 & 108 Funds: Los Angeles - Fresno - Bay Area/Sacramento Corridor (Proposed Service Level - Direct Service to Sacramento and LA, SP Route between Fresno and Stockton; estimated maximum speed 90 mph. Improvements include: preliminary engineering study of Grapevine alignment; improvements to Bakersfield, Fresno, Manteca, Madera, Modesto, Merced, Tudock, Hanford, Corcoran, Moiave, Saugus, Lancaster and Tehachapi stations; new station at L~di, Stockton and Sacramento; grade Crossing, sliding and control improvements; and curve realignments, Interrecjionai Projects Eligible For Prop. 111 Funds: Route Description of Project : 5 Lebec to Wheeler Ridge Widen 8 lane Freeway to 10 lanes. 10.5 miles 14 5 miles north of Mojave Widen 2 lanes to 4 lane Expressway. 9.3 miles 14 4 miles north of Mojave Construct CaJifomia City Blvd. interchange. 0.4 mile 14 28 miles north of Mojave Widen 2 lanes to 4 lane Expressway. 4.0 miles 14 8 mi. so. of Freeman Junction Widen 2' lanes to 4 lane Expressway. 5.8 miles 14 3 mi. so. of Freeman Junction Widen 2 lanes to 4 lane Expressway. 5.2 miles 14 5 mi. north of F.r:eeman Junction Widen 2 lanes to 4 lane Expressway. 5.1 miles Kecks Comer to Route 33 Widen to 40 feel 13.2 miles Route 33 to Route 5 Widen to 40 feel 12.0 miles 58 10 miles west of Bakersfield Construct 4 lane Expressway on new alignment. 10.7 miles 58 5 miles west of Tehachapi Add truck climbing lane (east bound). 9.2 miles 58 6 miles west of Mojave Construct interchange & upgrade to Freeway. 10.0 miles 58 Mojave Bypass Construct 4 lane Freeway On new alignment. 8.3 miles 10 mi. north of Bakersfield Widen 6 lane Freeway to 8 lanes. 6.6 miles 20 mi. north of Bakersfield Widen 6 lane Freeway to 8 lanes. 8.2 miles 99 (McFadand to Delano) ' Widen 4 lane Freeway to 6 lanes. 395 (Johannesburg) Widen 2 lanes to 4 lane Expressway, 7.0 miles 395 - 9 mi. north of Johannesburg Widen 2 lanes to 4 lane Exl~ressway. 4.2 miles .. 395 .. 15 mi. north of Johannesburg Widen 2 lanes to 4 lane Expressway. 4.0 miles 395 5 miles south of Inyo~ern Widen 2 lanes to 4 lane Expressway, 7.8 miles 395 (Inyokern) Widen 2 lanes to 4 lane Expressway. 6.4 miles Meeting Date: May 16, 1990 Agenda Section: Reports Agenda Item: 8e. TO: HONORABLE MAYOR AND CITY COUNCILMEMBERS Approved FROM: J. DALE HAWLEY, CITY MANAGER Department Head DATE: May 10, 1990 City Manager City Attorney SUBJECT: Report No. 2-90 from the Legislative and Litigation Committee regarding Proposition 111 and Proposition 108. 1. A Resolution of the Council of the City of Bakersfield Supporting Proposition 111, "The Traffic Congestion Relief and Spending Limitation Act of 1990", and Supporting Proposition 108, "The Passenger Rail and Clean Air Bond Act of 1990." NOTE: The Committee Report was not available at the time of packet distribution. Copies of it will be distributed at the Council meeting. RECOMMENDATION: 1. Motion to accept report. Group Vote. 2. Motion to Adopt. Roll Call Vote. BACKGROUND: .alb RPT.3 D .AFT DRAFT LEGISLATIVE AND LITIGATION COMHITI'EE REPORT NO. - 90 MAY 16, F99o TO: HONORABLE MAYOR AND MEMBERS OF THE CITY COUNCIL SUBJECT: SUPPORT FOR PROPOSITIONS 111 AND 108 During April the City Council referred to the Legislative and Litigation Committee for review Proposition 111 which is on tile June 5, 1990 California ballot. During its deliberations, the Committee discussed the impact of both Proposition 111 and an accompanying bond authorization bill, Proposition 108. Proposition 111, the Traffic Congestion Relief and Spending Limitation Act of 1990, adjusts the way cities set their spending limits, allowing appropriations limits to be adjusted annually at a rate to keep pace with the economic growth of the city. It also allows For increases in vehicle fuel taxes al~d truck weight fees to fund needed Caltrans, county and city transportation improvements and revises the school funding initiative passed ill 1988 to balance the state's educational needs witil the needs of other state services. Proposition 108, the Passenger Rail and Clean Air Bond Act. authorizes the State to issue $1 billion in genei-al obligation bonds to pay For rail transportation projects. As a bond act it must be separate from Proposition 111 but cannot be implemented unless Proposition 111 passes. Cities provide a major role '~n building and mair~tai!'~ir~g lccal streets and' roads. 'Bakersfield, as the major municipal hub ih tile County of Kern, is very aware of the 'impacts transportation needs have on tile infrastructure and on the environment. Cities have been financially str~pped and l~a,./e ~een unable to maintain local streets, roads and other transportation systems, let alone build new projects to meet the major growth experienced in the past decade. Through Proposition 111, Californians can modify the existing government spending limit and provide a traffic congestion relief package geared to Felieve the massive transportation gridlock crisis -Facing the state. The Legislative and Litigative Committee ur9es the Cil~y Council to support both Proposition 1ii and Proposition 108 to provide an infusion of new revenues to the state, cities and counties to fund badly needed improvements in the transpor'tation system. Therefore, the Committee recommends that the City Council accept this report and adopt the resolution. Respectfully submitted, Patricia DeMond, Chair Patricia Smith Lynn Edwards DRAFT RESOLUTION NO. A RESOLUTION OF THE COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF BAKERSFIELD SUPPORTING PROPOSITION 111, "THE TRAFFIC CONGESTION RELIEF AND SPENDING LIMITATION ACT OF 1990" AND SUPPORTING PROPOSITION 108, "THE PASSENGER RAIL AND CLEAN AIR BOND ACT OF 1990." WHEREAS, the State of California faces monumental challenges -- meeting dramatically increased law enforcement and public safety needs, addressing spiraling health care costs, coping with unprecedented population growth, managing traffic congestion and teaching our children the skills necessary to compete in the modern work force; and WHEREAS, Proposition 111 would update the government spending limit to allow state and local governments greater flexibility in making use of already collected tax dollars generated by California's strong economy to address these needs; and WHEREAS, it would allow the state to increase user fees (a 5-cent per gallon fuel tax increase this year and an additional 1 cent for each of the next four years) to provide increased funding for maintenance and improvement of highway and transit projects without reducing funds for other critical programs; and WHEREAS, basic funding guarantees provided to public schools on the November 1988 ballot are retained; and WHEREAS, without a change in the government spending limit, it will be impossible to maintain the generally high level df education, transportation, health services, law enforcement, senior programs and other vital services to the residents of California; and WHEREAS, Propositions 111 and 108 are supported by a broad coalition, including California Association of Highway Patrolmen, California Taxpayers Association, League of Women Voters of California, League of California cities, County Supervisors Association of California, California Chamber of Commerce, AARP (American Association of Retired Persons) State Legislative Committee, California Association of Hospitals and Health Systems, California Council of Police and Sheriffs, California Schools Employees Association, California School Boards Association, Congress of California Seniors, California Transit Association, State Building and Construction Trades Council of California, and many others; and WHEREAS, reduction in the state's traffic congestion will. require substantial investments in alternative methods of transportation in the expansion and construction'of transit~ facilities. The June 1990 ballot also contains a $1 billion general obligation bond for urban, commuter and intercity rail projects -- including BART, MetroRail in Los Angeles and urban light rail to address this need. NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED by the Council of the City of Bakersfield that the Council supports passage of Proposition 111, the Traffic Congestion Relief and Spending Limitation Act of 1990, and Proposition 108, the Passenger Rail and Clean Air Bond Act of 1990 on the June 5, 1990 ballot. o0o - 2 - I HEREBY CERTIFY that the foregoing Resolution was passed and adopted by the Council of the City of Bakersfield at a regular meeting thereof held on , by the following vOte: CITY CLERK and EX OFFICIO CLERK of the Council of the City of Bakersfield APPROVED CLARENCE E. MEDDERS MAYOR of the City of Bakersfield APPROVED as to form: ARTHUR J. SAALFIELD CITY ATTORNEY of the City of Bakersfield AJS/meg PROPlll.RES 5/14/90 - 3 -