The URL can be used to link to this page

Home My WebLink About1973-05-29; City Council; 2047; San Diego Ad Hoc Committee Park Developmenti T It E C r T Y O F C A R L S B A D, C A L L F' O R N T A Agenda Bill No. Date: May 29, 1973 -Referred To: Subject: Submitted By: San'%Diego County Ad Hoc'Committee on Park Development City Manager 1 • Statement of the Matter Mr. Fred Morey, County Chief Administrative O.fficer,'has requested the City Council to appoint a member to a County Ad Hoc Committee on Park Development. Purpose of this Committee would be to establi-'sh priorities for the $6.3 million dollars available for park acquisition and development in San Diego County if -Proposition One passes in June, 1974v • r t Exhibit t 1. Letter dated 5/1/73 from Mr. Morey. { 2. Letter dated 2/13/73 from William penn Mott, Jr., r Director - State Department of Parks and Recreation Staff Recommendations r .F w i I i Ad No. Date: May 29, 1973 • ' 73 • k City Manager's Recommendation • t ' i Aop"oint a member of the City Council to serve on the ad -hoc committee.. f •Council'Action i • 6-5-73 Matter continued to•the next meeting at which a.full Council wili be present. 6-19-73 Councilman Lewis was appointed to the SanTiegonDounty Ad Hoc Committee; on Park Development and Parks and Re^reation Director Ed Johnson was , appointed as the alternate. ' t -2- ' r• FREO J. MOREY CHIEF ADMINISTRATIVE OFFICER May 1, 1973 COUNTY OF SAN DIEGO CHIEF ADMINISTRATIVE OFFICE County Administration Cantor 1600 Pacific Highway San Diego, California 92101 Mr. David M. Dunne, Mayor City, of Carlsbad 1200 Elm Avenue Carlsbad, Ca. 92008 Attnt Jack B. Arnold Dear Mr. Dunne: MEMBERSOF THE BOARD Or SUPERVISORS JACK WALSH IST aISTRICT DICK BROWN 2D DISTRICT LOUNCONDE SIID DISTRICT JIM BEAR AITN DISTRICT WILLIAM A. CRAVEN DTN DISTRICT In June 1974 the people of California will vote on Proposition One, a $250 million bond issue authorized by AB392 to provide funds to acquire and establish beaches, parks, recreational facilities and historical resources throughout the State. Of the $250 million, $160 million -,vill be expended by the State and $90 million will be available for grants to cities, counties, and districts. San Diego County's tentative share of the $90 million is approximately $6.3 million. The Bond Act requires the County to consult with all cities and districts within the County which are authorized to provide park and recreation services, and to submit a priority plan by June 30, 1975, for expenditure of the County's allocdtion. In addition, Mr. William•Penn Mott, Jr., Director of the State Department of Parks and Recreation, has requested preliminary information on high priority requirements within the County by January 1974 to be used for public information regarding potential benefits from the Bond Act, A copy of Mr. Mott's letter is attached. I would like to suggest the formation of an ad hoc committee composed of representatives of the principal jurisdictions affected by the Bond Act to plan for selection of the projects to be funded with the County's share of the $90 million. The Committee could also consider recommendations to the State regarding disposition of the portion of the $160 million share which will be used in the County. I think it would be desirable for this group to meet early in July, and I would appreciate a reply from you by June 1 designating a representative to serve on the committee. David M. Dunne, Mayor -2- May 1, 1973 City of Carlsbad Proceeds from the bond issue will provide a big boost for park and recreational facilities throughout the County, and we will be grateful for your assistance in planning for development of the program. Please advise Mr. Ed Moses, Park Development Director, 5555 Overland AvenuL, San Diego, Ca. 92123, of the name of your representative. Very truly yours, F. Morey Ch a Administrative Officer FJM:LEB:jag Enc. �• 1 I I i ' k i it STATE nV Sp(,IiC�41,]1 r�_eeen �isrce AGENCY / / DEPARTM"E:NT Or PARKS AND RECREATION rFi P.O. BOX 2390 �� /`�•�fit SACRAMCNTO 95911 i February 13, 1973 TO ALL LOCAL PUBLIC OFFICIALS On August 15, 1972, Governor P.eagan signed into law AB 392, Chapter 912, Statutes of 1972, the State Beach, Park, Recreational and Historical racilities Bond Act of 1974. This Act, viiich requires a =jority vote of the people,.author— izes the issuance of bonds in the amount of $250 million to provide funds to acquace and establish beaches, parks, recreational facilities and historical resources. It will be submitted to the voters as Proposition One in June of 1974. Of the $250 million, $90 million will be available for grants to cities, counties and districts for the acquisition and develop=ent of recreation, park and histori— cal areas and facilities. Prelir..inrry estimates indicate that the $90 million will be distributed to the 58 counties as shown on the attached list. The Bend Act calls for each county to consult with all cities and districts within the county which are authorized to provide park and recreation services. The pur— pose of such meetings is to develop a "priority plan for expenditure" of the ,Is allocation of the 1974 bond funds. The priority plan which must be :tcd to the State by June 30, 1975 must be approved by at least 50% of the o and districts, representing 50% of the population of the -cities and districts L the county and by the County Board of Supervisors. Applications appearing priority plan may be submitted directly to the State by the individual fictions. igh the election is more than one year away, I feel that it is timely for all to begin to consider how the bond funds should be expended. Section 5096.73(d) : Bond Act specifies that "...it is desirable for the people of this state to irior notice of the proposed disposition and allocation of the proceeds of fond issue". In accordance witIT this section, I intend to prepare in 1973 ;ram of high priority projects indicating how the State Department of Parks :creation would plan to spend its share of the bond funds, and I would like :ourage each county to begin evaluating and listing its high priority needs. A appreciate receiving a listing of your high priority needs or such other iarion as you believe best reflects the proposed expenditures in your county. .eve it is very important that both state and local government agencies �p this information by January 1974 in order to advise the public of the Aal benefits of the 1974 Bond Act and what it can mean to them in terms of : services. "I�1_13- I�+li}IIIIII �� s v , rt I Y _r ALL LOre,L PUBLIC 10' L 4LhLS -2= FObruary 13, 1973 I am certain that many of you have questions concerning the Bond Act. Members of my staff are prepared to respond to your questions and are available for meetings on this subject. I have appointed Richard May of my Department as the Chief of Bond Program Coordination. Counties, cities, or districts wishing to submit suggestions for State Park System acquisition and development projects crithin or near their jurisdictions are invited to contact Mr. May directly. Questions related to the distribution of local grant funds and the administration of the grant program may be directed to Mr. Russell W. Porter, Chief, Grants and Statewide Studies Division at this address. i v Z • t ^ illiam Penn N.ott, r. Director Attachments { i 1 i f 1 's i i r i i i i ALLOCATION TO COUNTIES OF "iTATE GRANT MONIES" AUTHORIZED BY THE STATE BEACH, PARK, RECREATIONAL AND HISTORICAL FACILITIES B)ND ACT OF 1974 POPULATION POPULATION ESTIMATE ALLOCATION ESTIMATE COUNTIES July 1, 1980 BY COUNTY COUNTIES July 1,_1980 Alameda 1,217,700 4,316,866 Orange, 1,939,700 Alpine 600 200,000 Placer 95,000 Amador 14,300 200,000 Plumas 12,600 Butte 111,200 394,215 Riverside 572,500 'Calaveras 17,100 200,000 Sacramento 740,50 Colusa 12,700 200,000 San Benito 22,000 Contra Costa 689,100 2,442,927 San Bernardino 851,2nO Del Norte 15,000 200,000 San Diego 1,790,800 El Dorado 54,500 200,000 San Francisco 721,6nn Fresno 454,100 1,609,829 San Joaquin 340,100 Glenn 17,700 200,000 San Luis Obispo 133,1r,1 Humboldt 108,000 382,871 San Mateo 61371nn Imperial 83,500 296,016 Santa Barbara 321,2()n Inyo 19,800 200,000 Santa Clara 1,386,600 Vern 366,800 1,300,342 Santa Cruz 161,100 Kings 69,400 246,030 Shasta 91,500 Lake 26,000 200,000 Sierra 2,60n Lassen 18,400 200,000 Siskiyou 34,400 Los Angeles 7,680,500 27,228,124 Solano 214,3nO Madera 42,200 200,000 Sonoma 275,100 Marin 261,900 928,461 Stanislaus 240,5()0 Mariposa 7,700 200,000 Sutter 49,100 -Mendocino 59,400 210,579 Tehama 31,900 Merced 117,000 414,776 Trinity 8,200 Modoe 7,300 200,000 Tulare 211,50n Mono 6,200 200,000 Tuolumne -29,31)n Monterey 303,500 1,075,937 Ventura 574,700 Napa 102,500 363,373 Yolo 119,004 Nevada 31,700 200,000 Yuba 4%11)0 23,548,00 January 12, 1573 ALLOCATION BY . COMY 6,876,426 336,784 200,0�'`. 2,029;S�iy 2.625,145 200,OOn 3,017., 587 6,348,561 2,558,143 1,205688 471:853 2,173,500 1,138,685 4,915,633 571,115 324,376 20(),000 200,000- 7 5 9, 7"-• r 975,2�Y 832,596 200,000 200,010 200,000 749,788 .200,000 2,037,368 421,867 260,000 86,400,000 Department of Parks and Recreation calculation using Department of Finance population estimates, "Provisional Projections of California Counties to 2000". These projections are to be revised in January 1974. The revised projections will be used as the official basis for the allocation of funds for the 1974 Bond Issue. I