Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAbout1981-08-04; City Council; 6694; SANDAG Joint Powers Agreement VotingCITY OF CARLSBAD AGENDA BILL NO. jp 6 9 T Xnitial: Dept. Head DATE: August 4, 1981 City Atty.. DEPARTMENT:_- City Manager City Mgr. Subject:- SANDAG - JOINT POWERS AGREEMENT Voting Statement o£'the Matter SANDAG,Board authorized a change in voting procedures because of the withdrawal of the County as a member. Current rules for weighted vote require five member agencies, plus 5'1$. The amendment proposes that whiXe the County is not a member, it takes bnly 4 member agencies,plus 51t. Exhibit SANDAG-Report 7/20/81 Resolution �1 Recommendation Adopt Resolution No.-& 4;Zq approving change in weighted vote formula for SANDAG. APPROVED San Diego ASSOCIATION OF ,a'?17T 95 GOVERNMENTS Suite 524, Security Pacific Plaza c Ait 19$l iMO Third Avenue �' o San Diego, California£2101 O 1714) 23&5300 July 21, 1981 r' `'', 0 TO: City Managers T M: Richard J. Huff, Executive Director RE: SANDAG Joint Powers Agreement Amendment (k1.July 20, 1981 the S,ANDAG Board authorized distribution of an amend- ment'to the SAMhG-Joint PorNers Agreement to -each member agency for action. The amendment would alter the weighted voting formula as described'below. The exact language of the amendment is shown -on page 5 of Attachment B. the amendment would provide that while the County of Sari Diego is not a mei)ber,of SAMD G, it would take only four member agencies (instead of five which is required now) plus 51% of the weighted vote to -overturn an action taken under the "one­inoiiber, one -vote"' procedure. When the County rejoins SANMG, the number required would again be five. Ibe rationale for changing the vote is described in- Board of Directors Report e, item 2, which is attached hereto. we -would- appreciate it if you would place this item on your ComcilIs agenda and inform us of its action. Please call me or =r attorMY, Debra Greenfield, at 235-5300 if you. -have any questions. Sincerely, (4RIC J. Executive Director R7H:DAG:rw Enclosures 4 1200 ELM AVENUE CARLSBAD, CALIFORNIA 9" 008 Office of the City Clerk August 7, 1981 +n� 'C Res m t 411 010� Richard Huff, Executive Director SANDAL Suite 524, Security Pacific Plaza 1200 Third Ave. San blego, CA 92161 The Carlsbad City Coiuicil, at its meeting .of August 4, 1981; adopted Resolution No. 6629, approving an amendment to the Joint Powers Agreement between the San Diego Association of Go agencies. vernments and its m6mbez' Enclosed for your records and information is a certified copy of the above referenced Resolution -No. 6629. If you have any questions regarding -this matter, please do not hesitate to contact this office. - ALETHA.L. RAUTENKRANZ -- City Clerk ALR:krs .Enclosure TELEPHOINE: (714) 43&5W5 ' • it � � � �, I RESOLUTION NO. 6629 2 A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF CARLSBAD, CALIFORNIA APPROVING AN AMENDMENT 3 TO THE JOINT POWERS AGREEMENT BETWEEN SAN DIEGO ASSOCIATION OF GOVERNMENTS AND ITS MEMBER 4 AGENCIES.- . 6 The City Council of the City of Carlsbad, California, does 6 hereby resolve as follows: 7 1. xhat an amendment altering the weighted voting formula 8 in the Joint Powers Agreement between the San Diego Association 9 of Governments (SANDAG) and its member agencies, a copy of which 3.0 is attached hereto marked Exhibit "A" and made a part hereof, is 11 hereby approved. 12 Z: That the Mayor of the City of Carlsbad is hereby authorize 13 and -directed to execute said agreement for and on behalf of the '14 City of Carlsbad. 15 PASSED, APPROVED AND ADOPTED at a regular meeting of the City 16 Council of the City of Carlsbad, California, held the 4th day 17 of August , 1981, by the following vote,. to wit: 18 AYES: Council Fbwbers Casler, Anear, Lewis and-Kulch3n 19 NOES: None 20 ABSENT: Council Amber Packard 21 (� _ RONALD C, PACKARD, Mayor 22 ATTEST: WRY H. CASLER, Vice -Mayor 23 AL�ETHA L. RAUTEN , City Cl rk 24 (SEAL) 25 26 27 28 12 ( San Diego Association of Governm BOARD OF DIRECTORS Resolution A to Resolution No. 6629, DATE: 7/20/81 � AGENDA REPORT No.: es (page 5, C. ) EpAUMICN MhtW= REXXI *ZIZ TIONS 1. Overall work Program/Budciet Review Process Upon initiation by the City of San Diego, the Board directed the Evaluation Ccnntiittee to -analyze and make reccimendations on the annual Overall Work Program a (6w) /Budget Process. Eased on review of the history (Attachment C) and the current 'procedure and in the interest of more periodic review of program and financial status and to enhance involvement by the Program Review CamAttee (of Managers), ;a it is the Evaluation Camdttee's f, RE0UMmMTI0N that the following additional process be carried out for the next cycle with_reevaluation to take place in approximately one year: a. That the Budget Committee, as presently constituted, review the status of the work program and budget each October and February and report to the 30ard; b. That the Program Review Comittee, as presently constituted, attend the pro- gram status meetings held by the Budget Committee; and c. That the first regular Budget Committee meeting on the caning fiscal year Budget be a joint meeting of the Program Review Ca dttee and the Budget Ccumnittee memmbers. 2. Weichted voting Formula Ttae weighted vote of SANDAG was a concept conceived in 1971 to provide more equitable voting balance to the Mm ber Agencies on issues of extraordinary concern. While it "approaches" the one man -one vote principle, it also was viewed as a "balanced" formula, so that no single agency or small group of members could dominate the Board. Originally, the City of San Diego was given 40 votes (popu- lation then accounted for about 52% of the regional total); the County 30 votes (population of the unincorporated areas was then about 25% of the region); and the renaming cities draided 30 votes proportional to their population. in 1980, with the County and Escondido no longer maWoexs, the formula was revised with each member agency receiving a proportional weighted vote according to its population, with the proviso that no member would get more than 40 votes. The City of San Diego in 1980 represented apprcxima-tely 46% of the regional population, but with the County and Escondido out, San Diego represented about 62%-of the "member represented" population in SANDAG. The weighted voting procedure requires that there be two seconds on a motion to call for the weighted vote and that 5 Member Agencies voting affirmatively 1-1 and 51% of the weighted vote total are required to carry a motion. The 5 Member Agency requirement was originally included so that the City of San Diego and the County, with 70% of the weighted vote, could not prevail without some support from the smaller cities. There is a legitimate issue regarding the Head for the 5 Member Agency requirement with the County a non-member, since no 2 entities control a majority of the weighted vote. Presently it would take a minimum of 3 Member Agencies to gain 51% of the vote since the next highest weighted vote after San Diego (40) is 9. As pointed out in the Evaluation Committee discussion, it is hypothetically possible for 4 agencies representing 66% of the weighted vote (San Diego, Chula Vista, Oceanside, El Cajon) to fail to carry a weighted vote for lack of a fifth concurring agency. The Evaluation CcMnittee felt that amending the 5-agency requirement for the time that the County remains outside SA1NDAG should be discussed at this time before any.particular issue of conflict arises which would likely necessitate a weighted vote. The committee therefore reccumended that this question be discussed first by the Executive Committee and then by the Board of Directors. The EAecutive Committee met on July 6 and recam ended the .Board discuss changing the Formula to require only 4 concurring agencies rather than 5 to carry a weighted vote, with the proviso that when the County rejoins SANDAL, the Formula revert to 5 concurring agencies. If the Board agrees with the above proposal to change the vote formula, it should, by vote, authorize staff to forward Attachment B to the Member Agencies for their, action. Unanimous approval by Member Agencies is required to amend the JPA. 3. Planning Consolidation Finally, the Evaluation Committee considered the reccm endations from the Callahan Task Force which were referred to it by the Board. With respect to Policy 6 dealing with the consolidation of single purpose responsibilities under the general purpose areawide agency (SANDAG), it is the Evaluation Cammittee's RDC.CXr'MATICN that "Consolidation of regional planning activities should be en- couraged and welcomed.in favor of 'comprehensive' planning rather than 'single purpose' planning." The Ccnanittee feels that such consolidation would be more efficient and that asso- ciations of governments, such as SANDAG, are appropriate vehicles to use for. this purpose. RICHARD J. HUFF Executive Director Attachments " • �``, Attachment A . Certified Population, Weighted (Dept. of Finance) Vote*as of January.l, % of _ $ of Agency July 1, 1981_ 1981 Region Membership Carlsbad 4 35,606 1.87% 2.49% Chula Vista 9 84,375 4.44 5.91 Coronado 2 19,315 1.02 De Mar 1 " 5, 060 .27 ' . 35 El Cajon 8 74,757 3.93 . 5.24 Imperial Beach 3 22,962- 1.21 1.61 . La Mesa 5 49,917 2.63 3.50 Lemon -Grove 2 20,764 1.09 1.45 National City 6 52,810 2.78' 3.70 Oceanside 9 18,179 4.12 5.47 San Diego 40 887,748 46.72 62.17 San MSS 2 17,832 .94 1.25 Santee 5 41,688 2<19 2.92 Vista 4_ 37,040 1.95 2.5?. Total Members: 100 1,428,053 - 75.16% 1008 � Escondido 65,564 3.45 Poway' 33,257 1.75 County 373•.073 19.64 Total Region: 1,899,947 loot, *Since 1971, the weighted vote has been used only 18 times, 12 of Vhich were -during 1975. The most recent such vote was called for on February 27, 1978. a Attachment B B. Vote of -Board of Directors A. The Board of Directors shall vote on all items on the basis of one vote per signatory Member Agency, except if representatives of three signatory -Member. Agencies request a weighted vote after N*ting on any particular item, then in that event a new weighted vote which will be final and binding, shall be taken. B. When the weighted vote is taken there shall be a total of one, hundred votes, except additional votes shall be allowed pursuant to Section 19: Each representative shall have that number of votes determined by the following apportionment formula, provided that each Member Agency shall have at least one vote, no Member Agency shall have more than 40 votes, and there shall be no fractional vote: 1. Determine each Member Agency's population. If any Member Agency has 40 percent or more of the total.popu- lation of the San Diego County region, allocate 40 votes to that Member Agency and follow step 2; if not, follow step 3. 2. Total the population of the ranainIng Manber Agencies determine4 in step 1 and oompute percentage of this total that each Member Agency has. — 4 a. Multiply each percentage derived above by 60 to determine fractional shares. b. Boost fractions that are less than one to one; add the whole numbers. c. I£ the answer to step h. is 60, drop all fractions and the whole numbers are the votes for each Member Agency. d. If the answer to step b, is less than 60, the remaining vote(s) is allocated one each to that Member Agency(s) having the highest fraction(s) excepting those whose vote was increased to one (1) in step b. above. e. If the answer to step b. is more than 60, the excess vote(s) is taken one'ea.h from the Member Agency(s) with the lowest fraction(s). In no case may a vote be reduced to.less than one. 3. Total the population determined in step 1 and compute percentage of this total that each Member Agency has. a. Boost fractions that are less tharr one to one; add the whole numbers. b. If the answer to step a. is 100, drop all fractions and the whole numbers are the votes for each Member Agency. c. If the answer to step a. is less than 100, the xemaining vote(s) is allocates, one each to that Member Agency(s) having the highest fraction(s) excepting those whose vote, was increased to one (1) in step a. above. d. If the answer,to step a. is more than 1,00, the excess vote(s) is taken one'each from that Member Agency(s) with the lowest fraction(s). In no case may a vote be reduced to less than.one. C. , When the weighted vote is ' zimi, the vote of not less than five (5) Member Agencies, represen—hg not less than fifty-one percent (51%) of the total weighted vote of the signatory Member Agencies shall be required to supersede the original action. I£ the County of San Diem is not a Member Aaencv. the vr&i- of nnf- leas i•hnn frmv- fdl Kq .ml, vote shall, stand. Except as hereinafter provided in Subsection (D), the weighted vote shall be as follows:* *Re=vuted 11/80. • City of San Diego 90 Other Cities: Del Mar i Coronado 2 Lemon Grove 2 ` San Marcos 2 i Imperial Beach 3 Carlsbad 4 Vista 4 x La Mesa 5 Santee 5 National City 6 El Cajon 8 Chula Vista 9 Oceanside 9 60 TOTAL 100 and shall be recmiputed in the above manner on July 1 of 1974, and every year thereafter. upon withdrawal of any member, the weighted vote shall not be r6cwI uted but the total votes cast will be reduced by the weighted vote of the withdrawing Member. Agency. D. Without affecting the weighted vote of other Member Agencies when a weighted vote is requested on any of the follow- ing items which are identified by number as listed in the Cata-i log.of Federal Domestic Assistance published by the United States Office of Management and Budget (7th Ed., 1973), it will require{ not less than sixty percent (60%) of the weighted vote to super- sede -the position taken by Lhe County of San Diego on the ,unit vote. 13.206 darprehensive Health Planning - Areawide Grants 13.211 Comprehensive Health Services - Forgtrsla Grants � 13.220 Health Facilities Construction - Grants 13.226 Health Services Research and Development Grants 13.235 Mental Health - Ccarmmi.ty Assistance Grants for Narcotic Addiction and Drug Abuse - 13.240 Mental Health - Community Mental Health Centers g 13.246 Migrant Health Grants 13.251 Mental Health - Cc munity Assistance Grants for Comprehensive Alcoholism Services 6 13.252 Mental Health - Direct Grants for Projects 13.253 Health Facilities Construction - Loan and Iran Guarantees A.254 Mental Health - Direct Grants for Special Projects 13.255 Health Maintenance Organization Service 13.340 Health Professions Teaching Facilities - Construction Grants 13.350 Medical Library Assistance - Regional Medical. Libraries 13.369 Nursing School Construction 13.746 Rehabilitation Services and Facilities - Basic Support 13.753 Developfi=t DisabAities - Basic Support I 11.756 Aging - Spacial Support Programs 13.763 Rehabilitation Services and Facilities - Special Projects 13.764 Youth Development and Delinquency 16.500 Law Enforcefferit Assistance - Cmprehensive Planning Grants 17.230 Migrant Workers 49.063 Ccftprehensive Health Services 1 49.064 Drug Rehabilitation (To HA9) 49.006 Family Planning (To HEW) 49.009 Migrant and Season Farmaorker Assistance (To DOL) 66.001 Air Pollution Control Program Grants 66.005 Air Pollution Survey and'Demonstration Grants 72.001 Foster Grandparents4 4Sectiom -8 am.,xded 10/74, 11/80 4 ' a 3