Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAbout1989-09-26; City Council; 10273; REPORT OF THE PROPOSITION C BLUE RIBBON COMMITTEE - REGIONAL PLANNING> z 0 E U 0 % .. z 0 6 g a z 3 0 0 Cw OF CARLSBAD - AGEN- BILL 9/26/89 RIBBON COMMITTEE - REGIONAL PLANNING CI ' AB#- TITLE: REPORT OF THE PROPOSITION C BLUE Dl MTG. DEPT. CI RECOMMENDED ACTION: Pln Review Report of the Blue Ribbon Committee appointed to implement Propo C - The Regional Planning and Growth Control Measure. Item Ex~lanation This is a request to review the Report of the Proposition C Blue Committee regarding Regional Planning. It should be emphasized th charge of the Committee was not to recommend a growth management st for the region but only to recommend an appropriate organizational str for a Regional Board. With respect to the organizational structur following is a brief summary of the report's recommendations: That SANDAG serve as the Regional Board. SANDAG staff would r staff support to the Board. 2. That a technical committee (composed of city managers and pl directors) be formed to make recommendations to the Board. 3. That subjects addressed by the Board be as follows: Qualil 1 ife standards and objectives; holding capacities; growt policies; growth phasing; regional land use distribution; monitoring; open space preservation; significant regional artc transportation system management: transportation demand maria! siting and financing regional facilities; consistency of r( and 1 ocal pl an; and regional growth management strategy. 4. That 1 ocal agencies "sel f-certi fy" whether their General P1, consistent with the Regional Plan once one is adopted. 5. That subregional activity be conducted by ad hoc comi appointed by the Regional Board. 6. That the Regional Board use SANDAG's present voting process Any comments or suggestions that the City Council has should be forwal the Blue Ribbon Committee. The Committee will use any appropriate c( or suggestions in its final report. Exhibits Report of Blue Ribbon Committee 1. P w .a r &Ut; QC ' 59 10: JC REPORT OF THE BLGE RIBBON COMMITTEE APPOINTED TO IMPLEMENT PROPOSITION C THE REGIONAL PLANNING AND GROWTH CONTROL MEASURE June 23, 1989 I. INTRODUCTfON In November, 1988, San Diego County's voters approved Proposition C, advisory measure proposing the creation of a Regional Planning and Gro Management Review Board. The measure suggested that a committee c posed of representatives of each city and the County be appointed to CORS and recommend, by Yune 30, 1989, an appropriate organizational structure the Regional Board. That committee, known as the "Blue Ribbon Commit1 was appointed by the respective councils and the Board of Supervisors. Committee began meeting in January, 1989. Its preliminary recornmendat: presented below, were completed on June 23, 1989. They are submitted tc governing bodies of the cities and the County for review and comment. Committee also is seeking input from other interested agencies, organizati and individuals. A suggested procedure and schedule for the review perk suggestions to prepare its Pinal report to the region, The Committee's recommendations are based on: - presentgd in part 4 of this regort, The Committee will use the comments A cooperative approach to regional growth management, as propose Proposition C; protecting local control over local planning and development decisior using existing agencies to achieve regional cooperation; avoiding duplication of responsibilities or transferring responsibi from one agency to another. - - - 2. SUMMARY OF RE:COMMENDATIONS The Blue Ribbon Committee recommends that SANDAG, througf Growth Management Review Board proposed in Proposition C; - amendment to its Joint Powers Agreement, serve as the Regional Plannh( The Regional Board would be composed of an elected represent from, and selected by, the governing body of each of the 18 cities ar County. Member agencies would have the option to appoint diff members for the SANDAG and Regional Board functions. Advisory votfng) membership would be offered to CALTRANS, the Department of Defense, and the San Diego Unified Port District. City of Tijuana has liaison membership on SANDAG. Staff support to the Board would be provided by SANDAG. A tecl committee would be established composed of management staff managers, planning directors) of the member agencies. - 1 *- RIJG @2 '29 1u:u3 0 0 i - The issues the Board should address are listed below. It should be nc that these items are not necessarily the exclusive domain of the Regit Board. The subjects are: quality of life standards and objectives; hol, capacities; growth rate policies; growth phasing; regional land use dii bution; growth monitoring; open space preservation; significant regi arterials; transportation sys tern management; transportat ion de II management; siting and financing regional facilities; consistencj regional and local glans; and regional growth management strategy, Committee concluded that the details on these subject ares shouli referred to the Regiunai Board once the Board is established. - Local agencies should determine ("self certify") the consistency of pertinent elements of their general plans with regional plans. 1 request by a rnembef agency, the Regional Board would review t self-certifications, and make findings regarding consistency. - Subregional activity, whenever and wherever appropriate, shoulc conducted by ad hoc committees appointed by the Regional Board. The Board should use SANDAG's present voting process. The Board should use SANDAG's conflict resolution procedure for resolving disg among member agencies, but only as a last resort when other op have been e-xhausted. Consideration also could be given to a me1 agency veto of Board decisions. - 3, DISCUSSION OF RECOMNENDATIONS The discussion presented below reflects the issues and alternatives consic by the Blue Ribbon Committee during the preparation of its prelim recorn mendat ions. Joint Powers Agreement to Estabiish Regional Board Before recummending the voluntary joint powers approach, the Committet considered the use of special state le@slation for setting up the Reg Board. Legislation was rejected because the Committee believes a voiur cooperative effort is more consistent with the intent of Proposition C. I' feels that the legislative option is always available if local agencies decid voluntary arrangement is inadequate. The Committee also was coria about the ramifications of state involvement in this program. Membership of the Regional Board In addition to the three agencies recommended for inclusion on the Boar districts. The Committee's conclusion was that Bogrd members should I sent agencies with land use control authority. Citizens and special dj representatives could be appointed to appropriate advisory committees. Committee considered members appointed from the public and s] 2 P a m 'HUG 02 '59 10:1.34 Staff Support to the Regional Board The other primary option considered on this issue, besides SANDAG staff, v a combined staff committee from various agencies. The Blue Ribt Committee decided to obtain direct local agency staff input by recommend creation of a technic& committee composed of management staff memb from the various jurisdictions. Determination of Consistency Between Local and Regional Plans Three basic options for determining consistency between local and regio plans were presented to the Committee, They were: "self-certification," v local agencies determining consistency between their respective plans pertinent regional plans; certification by the Board, with the regional b assessing local-regional consistency; and a combination of the two approacl with each local agency assessing consistency and Regional Board review these decisions- The Committee's proposal is a modified version of the tl option: local determination of consistency with Regional Board review findings regarding consistency only upon request by a member agency. Subregional Activity The Committee was presented with two basic choices for handling subregk issues. They were: creation of standing, multi-purpose subregional units appointment of ad hoc committees as needed, seiec ted. Voting Procedures One agency-one vote was discussed as an option to a weighted voting procei for the Board. The Committee concluded that SANDAG's current vo process should be recommended. This process is one agency one vote, wi weighted voting procedure available when requested by at least thee agenc Conflict Resolution SANDAG's procedure was the only dispute resolution approach considerel the Committee, but it suggested that it be used only when other option resolve local ageneg conflicts have been exhausted. agreed to consider the option of a local agency veto of regional b decisions. It should be noted that SANDAG's conflict resolution procel effectively gives local agencies a veto in disputes because they first I agree to enter into the process. Then, agreement with the proposed deci also is a local prerogative. PROCEDURE FOR REVIEW OF THE BLUE RIBBON COMMITTEE'S RECOMMENDATIONS As stated in Proposition C, the Wue Ribbon Committee shall forrnulat recommendation by no later than Yune 30, 1989." Presented below schedule for the review period following distribution of the Commit The ad hoc approach The Committee 4. report. 3 - !-. 0 * % ~IJG 41: ’37 ia:m Local agency review of the Committee’s proposals undoubtedly will extc through the summer 02 1989. The Blue Ribbon Committee should rem active during the local review period so that it can respond - with a final of recommendations -- to the comments it will receive from local governme the public, and other interested parties. Review Procedure I. Staff distributes the Committee’s report for review and comment to e city council, the Board of Supervisors, all other affected agencies, the public. Comments are requested within 90 days. Commit members and staff make themselves available to appear at Council/Bc and other meetings to present and dk?USg the report, Staff keeps Up 1 the local review schedules, (July-September). The Committee sponsors one or more public workshops on its report all local elected officials, other interested parties, and the public. E handles arrangements fur the workshop. (July) Staff assembles till comments on the report and presents a sugge final report and all comments to the Committee. The Comm reviews the material and makes its final recommendations. (Xu$ September) Staff distributes the final report and my implementing actions to city council, the Board of Supervisors, all other affected agencies, the public. Approval is requested from each agency’s governing 1: (October-Novem ber) 2, 3+ 4, 4 a e BRIAN E,. BILBRAY SUPERVISOR FIRST DISTRICT SAN DIEGO COUNTY BOARD OF SUPERVISORS e TO: ALL MAYORS, CITY COUNCILMEMBERS AND COUNTY SUPERVISORS FROM: SUPERVISOR BRIAN P. BILBRAY, CHAIRMAN PROPOSITION C BLUE RIBBON COMMITTEE DATE : JUNE 30, 1989 The Blue Ribbon Committee appointed to implement Proposi C, the Regional Planning and Growth Control Measure, prepared its report on this important issue. I am plea on behalf of the Committee, to submit the report for pu review. Throughout its work, the Committee directed its eff toward achieving consensus on its recommendations, and vote to distribute this report was unanimous. The Committee requests and welcomes your review and corn on this proposal. We hope to have the comments of all Councils, the Board of Supervisors, and other intere parties by the end of September. The other Commi members, staff from the joint agency staff group that he with this project, and I will be available upon reques answer your questions. During the preparation of its report, the Commi encouraged input from all interested individuals, agenc and organizations. Community forums were held throughout regional and oral and written comments were provided by than 100 persons and groups. To encourage your review, in early August, the Committee be sponsoring a general assembly for all elected offici At this assembly, we will discuss the Committee's reF giving you an opportunity to offer your ideas and hear opinions of your fellow elected officials. A notice a the time and place for this meeting will be sent to you E Following the General Assembly, we would suggest dock€ this item for action by your City Council. When all Councils and the Board of Supervisors responded, the Committee will meet again to consider comments and to determine if further action regarding recommendations should be taken. Any recommended act would then be submitted to each agency's governing body approval. e COUNTY ADMINISTRATION CENTER 1600 PACIFIC HIGHWAY 0 ROOM 335 SAN DIEGO. CA 92101-2470 (619) 531 e CHULA VlS7A OFFICE 0 430 OAVIOSON STREET SUITE D 0 CHULA VISTA CA 92010 2411 1619) 691-4700 W e June 30, 1989 Page Two Comments from City Councils and the Board of Supervisors, as well as any questions about the report, should be submitted to Mr. Stuart Shaffer, Deputy Executive Director, SANDAG, 1200 Third Avenue, Suite 524, San Diego, CA 92101; phone: Finally, I would like to express my appreciation to the other members of the Blue Ribbon Committee for their outstanding efforts during the past six months and their cooperation. It is important to note that the Committee completed its work on June 23, seven days prior to the date called for in the Proposition. 236-5331. We look forward to hearing from you soon. Sincerely, /A @ Brian P. Bilbr Supervisor, Fi Chairman, Prop C Blue Ribbon Committee BPB: cah Attachments cc: City Managers Chief Administrative Officer City Attorneys City Clerks Clerk of the Board of Supervisors County Counsel e 0 b REPORT OF THE BLUE RIBBON COMMITTEE APPOINTED TO IMPLEMENT PROPOSITION C THE REGIONAL PLANNING AND GROWTH CONTROL MEASURE June 23, 1989 0 1. INTRODUCTION In November, 1988, San Diego County's voters approved Proposition C advisory measure proposing the creation of a Regional Planning and Gr Management Review Board. The measure suggested that a committee posed of representatives of each city and the County be appointed to con and recommend, by June 30, 1989, an appropriate organizational structur the Regional Board. That committee, known as the "Blue Ribbon Commit was appointed by the respective councils and the Board of Supervisors. Committee began meeting in January, 1989. Its preliminary recommendat presented below, were completed on June 23, 1989. They are submitted tc governing bodies of the cities and the County for review and comment. Committee also is seeking input from other interested agencies, organizat and individuals. A suggested procedure and schedule for the review peril presented in part 4 of this report. The Committee will use the comments suggestions to prepare its final report to the region. The Committee's recommendations are based on: - A cooperative approach to regional growth management, as propose Proposition C; protecting local control over local planning and development decisior using existing agencies to achieve regional cooperation; - - - avoiding duplication of responsibilities or transferring responsibi 0 from one agency to another. 2. SUMMARY OF RECOMMENDATIONS The Blue Ribbon Committee recommends that SANDAG, through amendment to its Joint Powers Agreement, serve as the Regional Planning Growth Management Review Board proposed in Proposition C: - The Regional Board would be composed of an elected represents from, and selected by, the governing body of each of the 18 cities anc County. Member agencies would have the option to appoint diffe members for the SANDAG and Regional Board functions. Advisory ( voting) membership would be offered to CALTRANS, the Department of Defense, and the San Diego Unified Port District. City of Tijuana has liaison membership on SANDAG. Staff support to the Board would be provided by SANDAG. A tech committee would be established composed of management staff 1 managers, planning directors) of the member agencies. - e 1 w a - The issues the Board should address are listed below. It should be noted that these items are not necessarily the exclusive domain of the Regional Board. The subjects are: quality of life standards and objectives; holding capacities; growth rate policies; growth phasing; regional land use distri- bution; growth monitoring; open space preservation; significant regional arterials; transportation system management; transportation demand management; siting and financing regional facilities; consistency of regional and local plans; and regional growth management strategy. The Committee concluded that the details on these subject areas should be referred to the Regional Board once the Board is established. Local agencies should determine ("self certify") the consistency of the pertinent elements of their general plans with regional plans. Upon request by a member agency, the Regional Board would review these self-certifications, and make findings regarding consistency. - Subregional activity, whenever and wherever appropriate, should be conducted by ad hoc committees appointed by the Regional Board. The Board should use SANDAG's present voting process. The Board also should use SANDAG's conflict resolution procedure for resolving disputes among member agencies, but only as a last resort when other options have been exhausted. Consideration also could be given to a member agency veto of Board decisions. - - 3. DISCUSSION OF RECOMMENDATIONS The discussion presented below reflects the issues and alternatives considered by the Blue Ribbon Committee during the preparation of its preliminary recommendations. Joint Powers Agreement to Establish Regional Board Before recommending the voluntary joint powers approach, the Committee also considered the use of special state legislation for setting up the Regional Board. Legislation was rejected because the Committee believes a voluntary, cooperative effort is more consistent with the intent of Proposition C. It also feels that the legislative option is always available if local agencies decide the voluntary arrangement is inadequate. The Committee also was concerned about the ramifications of state involvement in this program. Membership of the Regional Board In addition to the three agencies recommended for inclusion on the Board, the Committee considered members appointed from the public and special districts. The Committee's conclusion was that Board members should repre- sent agencies with land use control authority. Citizens and special district representatives could be appointed to appropriate advisory committees. 2 e 0 Staff Support to the Regional Board The other primary option considered on this issue, besides SANDAG staff, a combined staff committee from various agencies. The Blue Ril Committee decided to obtain direct local agency staff input by recommen creation of a technical committee composed of management staff mem from the various jurisdictions. Determination of Consistency Between Local and Regional Plans Three basic options for determining consistency between local and regi plans were presented to the Committee. They were: "self-certif ication," pertinent regional plans; certification by the Board, with the regional assessing local-regional consistency; and a combination of the two approac with each local agency assessing consistency and Regional Board reviel these decisions. The Committee's proposal is a modified version of the ' option: local determination of consistency with Regional Board review 0 local agencies determining consistency between their respective plans findings regarding consistency only upon request by a member agency, Subregional Activity The Committee was presented with two basic choices for handling subreg. issues. They were: creation of standing, multi-purpose subregional unit appointment of ad hoc committees as needed. The ad hoc approach selected. Voting Procedures One agency-one vote was discussed as an option to a weighted voting proce for the Board. The Committee concluded that SANDAG's current v( process should be recommended. This process is one agency one vote, w weighted voting procedure available when requested by at least three agent Conflict Resolution a SANDAG's procedure was the only dispute resolution approach considere the Committee, but it suggested that it be used only when other optior resolve local agency conflicts have been exhausted. The Committee agreed to consider the option of a local agency veto of regional b decisions. It should be noted that SANDAG's conflict resolution proce effectively gives local agencies a veto in disputes because they first agree to enter into the process. Then, agreement with the proposed dec also is a local prerogative. PROCEDURE FOR REVIEW OF THE BLUE RIBBON COMMITTEE'S RECOMMENDATIONS As stated in Proposition C, the "Blue Ribbon Committee shall formulat recommendation by no later than June 30, 1989." Presented below schedule for the review period following distribution of the Commit report. 4. 0 3 W 0 Local agency review of the Committee's proposals undoubtedly will extend through the summer of 1989. The Blue Ribbon Committee should remain active during the local review period so that it can respond -- with a final set the public, and other interested parties. Review Procedure 1. of recommendations -- to the comments it will receive from local government, Staff distributes the Committee's report for review and comment to each city council, the Board of Supervisors, all other affected agencies, and the public. Comments are requested within 90 days. Committee members and staff make themselves available to appear at Council/Board and other meetings to present and discuss the report. Staff keeps up with the local review schedules. (July-September). The Committee sponsors one or more public workshops on its report for all local elected officials, other interested parties, and the public. Staff handles arrangements for the workshop. (July) Staff assembles all comments on the report and presents a suggested final report and all comments to the Committee. The Committee September) Staff distributes the final report and any implementing actions to each city council, the Board of Supervisors, all other affected agencies, and the public. Approval is requested from each agency's governing body. (October-November) 2. 3. reviews the material and makes its final recommendations. (August- 4. 4 e e JUNE 30, 1 e ATTACHMENTS TO THE REPORT OF THE BLUE RIBBON COMMITTEE ON PROPOSITION C The Blue Ribbon Committee directed that the following attachments be inc with the Committee's report: 1. 2 The Joint Powers Agreement establishing SANDAG A summary of the use of the weighted vote process at SANDAG I description of SANDAG's conflict resolution procedure. e 4B 0 e Sa4 Diego A§SOCIATION OF G0VEIRNMEn" Suite 524, Security Pacific Plaza 1200 Third Avenue San Diego, California 92101 (6191 236-5300 SAN DIEGO ASSOCIATION OF GOVERNMENTS PRESENTATION JOINT POWERS AGREEMENT This presentation reflects the Agreement and Amendments made between i CITY OF CARLSBAD, CITY OF CHULA VISTA, CITY OF CORONADO, CITY ( DEL MAR, CITY OF EL CAJON, CITY OF ENCINITAS, CITY OF ESCONDIC CITY OF IMPERIAL BEACH, CITY OF LA MESA, CITY OF LEMON GROJ CITY OF NATIONAL CITY, CITY OF OCEANSIDE, CITY OF POWAY, CITY ( SAN DIEGO, CITY OF SAN MARCOS, CITY OF SANTEE, CITY OF SOLA1 BEACH, CITY OF VISTA, and the COUNTY OF SAN DIEGO hereinafter collt tively or individually referred to as "Member Agencies."* RECITALS A. Member Agencies realize the upgent need for areawide planning E coordination in order to provide advice to public entities regarding all phases development within the region encompassed by the boundary of the County of 8 Diego. B. provide an organization capable of this areawide planning. Member Agencies believe that the joint exercise of their powers v 0 C. Member Agencies wish to create a regional organization which Y independently review and make comments to Member Agencies and grant regarding projects which may receive federal or state grants. D. Member Agencies believe that a San Diego Association of Governme directed solely by elected officials from each Member Agency with a st independent of any particular Member Agency is best suited for this areaw planning and review task. NOW, THEREFORE, in consideration of the recitals and the mutual obli tions of the parties as herein expressed, Member Agencies agree as follows: 1. Definitions The following terms shall have the meanings ascribed to them within 1 section unless the content of their use dictates otherwise: a. "Region" shall mean that territory physically lying within boundaries of the County of San Diego. * The official Agreement, Amendments and authorizing documents are on file the SANDAG office. e MEMBER AGENCIES Cities of Carlsbad, Chula Vista, Coronado, Del Mar, El Cajon, Encinitas, Escondido, Imperial B Lemon Grove, National City, Oceanside, Poway, San Diego, San blarcos, Santee, Solana Beach, Vista and County c ADVISORY/LIAISON MEMBERS California Department of Transportation, U S Department of Defense and Tijuana/Baj< 0 e b, "Population" of any Member Agency shall mean that popula last determined for each Member Agency as certified by the State Departmen Finance as of April 1, of each year, or if no certification has been made, the Federal Decennial Census, except that the population of the County of San Di shall be that population determined in the same manner for the unincorporr area of the County. The population of the region shall be that population de mined by adding the population of each Member Agency. a c. "Fiscal Year" shall mean that year beginning July 1, and en1 June 30. 2. Establishment of SANDAG' There is hereby created an organization to be known and denominated as San Diego Association of Governments (SANDAG), which shall be a public er separate and apart from any Member Agency. SANDAG shall be governed by terms of this Joint Powers Agreement and any bylaws passed and adopted b! governing board. 3. Purpose of Organization The specific and primary purpose for which this organization is created 1 engage in regional cooperative comprehensive planning to assist the Men Agencies and to provide a regional reviewing organization for certain federal state grant projects. Any recommendations, plans or programs promulgate( SANDAG shall be advisory only. Neither the San Diego Association of Governments nor a majority of members thereof shall have the authority to impose any plan, duty, obligatio other responsibility upon any Member Agency thereof without the consent of Agency; further, no Agency shall be required to do anything it does not spe cally agree to do. a 4. Powers of SANDAG~ As may be necessary for the accomplishment of the purposes of this ag ment, SANDAG shall have the power, in its own name, to make and enter contracts; to employ agents and employees under an adopted personnel systen provide for employee retirement, health and welfare benefits; to acquire, hold dispose of property, real and personal; to sue and be sued in its own name; to legal counsel and to incur debts, liabilities or obligations. However, the dt liabilities and obligations of SANDAG shall not constitute any debt, liabilit obligation of any of the Member Agencies which are parties to this agreem The Organization shall not be able to require additional permits. SANDAG resolution of the Board of Directors, shall designate an Auditor/ Comptroller Treasurer from among its officers or employees in accordance with Section 65 of the Government Code. The Auditor/Comptroller shall draw warrants or ch ' Section 2 amended 11/80 Z? Section 4 amended 11/80, 8/82 a 2 w e warrants against the funds of SANDAG in the Treasury when the demands are approved by the Board of Directors, or such other persons as may be specifically Treasurer shall comply with all duties under Article 1, Chapter 5, Division 7, Title I, of the California Government Code commencing with Section 6500. At the end of each fiscal year there shall be an audit conducted by an independent, accredited certified public accountant. designated for that purpose in the bylaws, Said AuditorKomptroller and 5. Accounts and Reports The Auditor/Comptroller of SANDAG shall establish and maintain such funds and accounts as may be required by good accounting practice or bylaws passed and adopted by this Organization. The books and records of SANDAG in the hands of the Auditor/Comptroller shall be open to inspection at all reasonable times by representatives of the Member Agencies. The Auditor/Comptroller of SANDAG, within 120 days after the close of each fiscal year, shall give a complete written report of all financial activities for such fiscal year to Member Agencies. 6. Funds3 The Treasurer of SANDAG shall receive, have the custody of and disburse SANDAG funds upon the warrant or check-warrant of the Auditor/Comptroller pursuant to the accounting procedures developed under Section 5 hereof, and shall make the disbursements required by this agreement or to carry out any of the provisions or purposes of this agreement. The Treasurer of SANDAG may invest SANDAG funds in accordance with general law. All interest collected on SANDAG funds shall be accounted for and posted to the account of such funds. 7. Governing Board of SANDAG4 All powers of this Organization shall be exercised by the Board of Directors. The Board of Directors shall be composed of one primary representative selected by the governing body of each Member Agency to serve until recalled by the governing body of said Member Agency. Each director must be a mayor, council- man, or supervisor of the governing body which selected him. Vacancies shall be filled in the same manner as originally selected. Each Member Agency shall also select in the same manner as the primary representative one alternate to serve on alternate shall be subject to the same restrictions and have the same powers, when serving on the Board of Directors, as the primary representative. the Board of Directors when the primary representative is not available. Such At its discretion, each Member Agency may select a second alternate, in the same manner as the primary representative, to.serve on the Board of Directors in the event that neither the primary representative nor the regular alternate is able to attend a meeting of the Board of Directors. Such alternate shall be subject to the same restrictions and have the same powers, when serving on the Board of Directors, as the primary representative. 3 Section 6 amended 8/82 4 Section 7 amended 3/74, 11/80, 7/84 1 3 e 0 The Board of Directors may allow for the appointment of advisory repres tatives to sit with the Board of Directors but in no event shall said representat! 0 be allowed a vote. Each director or a designated alternate acting in a director's absence, I receive reimbursement from SANDAG for out-of-pocket and travel expenses curred by such director or alternate on approved organizational business. Exc where prohibited by the charter, or any ordinance, rule, regulation, or policy ( Member Agency, each director, or a designated alternate acting in a direct absence, shall also receive $75.00 for each Board meeting or Executive Comr tee meeting attended. The Chairman shail receive additional monthly comE sation in an amount established from time to time by the Board of Directors. 8. Vote of Board of Directors5 a. The Board of Directors shall vote on all items on the basis of tory Member Agencies request a weighted vote after voting on any partic item, then in that event a new weighted vote, which will be final and binding, s be taken. vote per signatory Member Agency, except that if representatives of three si! b. When the weighted vote is taken there shall be a total of hundred votes, except additional votes shall be allowed pursuant to Section Each representative shall have that number of votes determined by the folloi apportionment formula, provided that each Member Agency shall have at least vote, no Member Agency shall have more than 40 votes, and there shall bg fractional vote: (1) Determine each Member Agency's population. If Member Agency has 40 percent or more of the total population of the Diego County region, allocate 40 votes to that Member Agency and fo step 2; if not, follow step 3. a (2) Total the population of the remaining Member Agen determined in step 1 and compute percentage of this total that each Men Agency has. (a) Multiply each percentage derived above by 6C determine fractional shares. (b) Boost fractions that are less than one to one; add whole numbers. (c) If the answer to step b. is 60, drop all fractions and If the answer to step b. is less than 60, the remai vote($ is allocated one each to that Member Agency(s) having highest fraction(s) excepting those whose vote was increased to onc in step b. above. whole numbers are the votes for each Member Agency. (d) ti Section 8 amended 10/74, 11/80, 1/85 a 4 W 0 (e) If the answer to step b, is more than 60, the excess vote@) is taken one each from the Member Agency@) 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 than one to one; add the whole numbers. (b) If the answer to step a. is 100, drop all fractions and (c) If the answer to step a. is less than 100, the remaining vote(s) is allocated one each to that Member Agency(@ having the highest fraction(s) excepting those whose vote was increased to one (1) in step a. above. If the answer to step a. is more than 100, the excess the whole numbers are the votes for each Member Agency. (d) 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 taken, the vote of not less than five (5) Member Agencies, representing 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. If the weighted vote fails, action determined by the original vote shall stand. Except as hereinafter provided in Subsection d., the weighted vote shall be as follows:* City of San Diego 40 County of San Diego 18 Chula Vista 6 Oceanside 5 El Cajon 4 Escondido 4 National City 3 Vista 3 Carlsbad 3 La Mesa 2 Santee 2 Poway 2 Encinitas 2 Imperial Beach 1 Solana Beach 1 * Recomputed 6/89. I 5 e 0 San Marcos 1 Lemon Grove 1 Coronado 1 Del Mar 1 Total: 100 0 and shall be recomputed in the above manner on July 1 of 1974, and every y' thereafter, Upon withdrawal of any Member Agency, the weighted vote shall nr be recomputed but the total votes cast will be reduced by the weighted vote the withdrawing Member Agency. d. Without affecting the weighted vote of other Member Agene when a weighted vote is requested on any of the items set forth in Article Section 1 of the Bylaws which are identified by number as listed in the Catalog Federal Domestic Assistance published by the United States Office of Manal ment and Budget, it will require the vote of not less than five (5) Mem' Agencies, representing not less than sixty percent (60%) of the total weigh vote to supersede the position taken by the County of San Diego on a unit vote. e. The voting procedure prescribed by Section 8(d) of the Jc Powers Agreement may be invoked with respect to other matters if, and only such other matters are, pursuant to State law, specifically and exclusively responsibility of the County of San Diego within its boundaries. Article Section 2 of the Bylaws lists those other matters subject to the voting proced prescribed by Section 8(d)* 9. Meetings The Board of Directors shall conduct regular meetings at least once er calendar month during the year and such other times as the Board of Direct shall direct or the bylaws specify. e 10. Bylaws The Board of Directors of SANDAG may adopt from time to time byla rules and regulations as may be required for the conduct of its meetings and orderly operation of the Organization; and copies and amendments thereto shall filed with each Member Agency. 11. The Executive Director The Board of Directors shall appoint an Executive Director who shall F Director shall be the chief executive officer of SANDAG and shall have s duties as may be prescribed by the Board of Directors. The Executive Direc shall have charge of all projects and property of the Organization and shall with the Treasurer of SANDAG an official bond in the minimum amount $100,000 or such larger amount as the Board of Directors specifies, guarantee faithful performance of his duties. office until he resigns or is removed by the Board of Directors. The Execul e 6 0 12. Financial a. The Board of Directors shall approve a preliminary budget no later than April 1 of each year. The Board of Directors shall adopt a final budget no later than June 1 of each year. A copy of the preliminary budget when approved and a copy of the final budget when adopted shall be filed with each Member Agency. b. Responsibility for supplying funds for that portion of the budget for SANDAG which is to be supplied by the Member Agencies, as adopted by the Board of Directors, shall be divided among the Member Agencies based on their population with each Member Agency including within its budget as funds to be supplied to SANDAG that sum of money determined by taking the ratio its popula- tion bears to the total population of the region and multiplying it by that portion of the approved budget to be supplied by the Member Agencies. Payment of this determined sum of money shall be made by each Member Agency by July 15 of each year. If payment by a Member Agency has not been made by September 1 of each year, that Member Agency shall cease to be a participating member of SANDAG, and its representative shall no longer participate or vote as a member of the Board of Directors. A delinquent Member Agency will be reinstated to participating membership and its representative allowed to participate on the Board of Directors when full payment has been made, including interest computed from July 15 at the established legal rate. Any Member Agency may make cash advances to SANDAG which must be repaid by SANDAG within the same fiscal year in which the advance was c. made. d. For operation for the first fiscal year, each signatory Member Agency shall pay over to the Treasurer of SANDAG, no later than fifteen (15) days after the adoption of the budget for the 1972-73 fiscal year by the Board of Directors, its share of that portion of the approved budget to be paid by Member Agencies. The County of San Diego shall be given credit toward 1972-73 fiscal year payment for that amount expended by it on behalf of SANDAG from July 1, 1972 through September 30, 1972. 13. Ralph M. Brown Act All meetings of SANDAG, including without limitation regular, adjourned regular, and special meetings of the Board of Directors, shall be called, noticed, held and conducted in accordance with the provisions of the Ralph M. Brown Act (commencing with Section 54950 of the California Government Code). 14. Quorum A majority of the voting members of the Board of Directors of SANDAG shall constitute a quorum for the transaction of business, except that less than a quorum may adjourn from time to time. In determining a quorum, the weighted vote shall not be used. 15. Procedures to be Followed ( 7 0 0 I L Pursuant to California Government Code Section 6509, which requires 1 the powers of SANDAG be limited by the legal restrictions placed upon a nai Member Agency, the powers of SANDAG delineated under Section 4 above shal subject to those legal restrictions imposed upon the City of Escondido by Constitution of the State of California and the laws governing general law citic e 16. Duration of Agreement This agreement shall continue in full force and effect until no less than ! of Member Agencies withdraw from this Organization by resolution. 17. Upon termination of this agreement any money or assets in possession of Organization after the payment of all liabilities, costs, expenses and char validly incurred under this agreement shall be returned to the Member Agencie proportion to their contributions determined as of the time of termination. Disposition of Assets upon Termination 18. Effective Date of Agreement This agreement shall become effective for all purposes at 12:Ol a.m. P.D September 10, 1972, if by that time such agreement has been executed by at 1( eight Member Agencies representing at least 75% of the regional population. soon as possible after the appointment of a sufficient number of representat to the Board of Directors to constitute a quorum, the Board of Directors s meet for the limited purposes of permitting the Board of Directors to ado1 budget for fiscal year 1972-73 (the local share not to exceed that amount in preliminary budget for independent operation approved by the Policy Commil on April 21, 1972, Le., $547,015), to make and enter into contracts, to emE agents and employees, to provide for employee retirement, health and welf benefits, to adopt an administrative manual (including purchasing, personnel, budgetary/accounting procedures), to acquire property, to adopt bylaws and re lations and to incur such debts, liabilities or obligations as may be necessary, s actions to become effective no earlier than October 1, 1972 so that the SAND provided for herein may become fully operative on October 1, 1972. e 19. In addition to the Agencies noted in the Preamble above, any other San Di County incorporated city which may desire to participate in the activities of San Diego Association of Governments may do so by executing this agreern without prior approval or ratification of the Member Agencies noted in Preamble of this agreement and shall be bound by the terms of this agreemen of the date of execution. The Member Agencies encourage the membership of new cities upon incorporation. Such later participating Member Agencies m notify SANDAG and the Member Agencies within ten (10) days after SI execution. Any later participating Member Agency shall receive one (1) v under the single vote procedure and one (1) vote under the weighted vote pro dure specified above until the next recomputation of the weighted vote as spc Later Partipating Member Agencies 6 ' Amended 11/80 0 8 w a fied in Section 8 above, at which time said participating Member Agency Until such recomputation, the total weighted vote may exceed 100. shall receive votes in accordance with the formula specified in said Section 8, 20. Agreement Repository A fully executed copy of this Joint Powers Agreement and any amendments thereto shall be filed with the Board of Directors and each signatory Member Agency. IN WITNESS WHEREOF, each of the following Member Agencies has caused this Joint Powers Agreement to be executed by having affixed thereto the signa- ture of the agent of said Agency authorized therefor by the legislative body of that Agency. CITY OF CARLSBAD CITY OF CORONADO CITY OF EL CAJON CITY OF ESCONDIDO CITY OF LA MESA CITY OF NATIONAL CITY CITY OF POWAY CITY OF SAN MARCOS CITY OF SOLANA BEACH CITY OF CHULA VISTA CITY OF DEL MAR CITY OF ENCINITAS CITY OF IMPERIAL BEACH CITY OF LEMON GROVE CITY OF OCEANSIDE CITY OF SAN DIEGO CITY OF SANTEE CITY OF VISTA COUNTY OF SAN DIEGO 9 0 0 June 30, 1 To: Subject: All Mayors, Councilmembers, and County Supervisors A Summary of the Use of the Weighted Vote Process at SAN and a Description of SANDAG's Conflict Resolution Procedure 0 Introduction The Blue Ribbon Committee suggested that the information presented bela distributed with the Committee's report. It is a brief history of the time, SANDAG weighted vote has been used, describing the circumstances, the su matter, and the results. Summary of the Use of the Weighted Vote at SANDAG January 15, 1973: The motion was made to table the San Diego Transit Corpor Claim for Local Transportation Funds and the accompanying apportionments. motion was approved on roll call vote. The City of San Diego, Coronado. Imperial Beach called for a weighted vote resulting in 21 yes votes (7 jurisdicl and 49 no votes (6 jurisdictions). The motion failed. Then the motion was made to approve the San Diego Transit Corporation c That motion failed on roll call vote. The City of San Diego, Coronado, and Irnr Beach called for the weighted vote resulting in 51 yes votes (6 jurisdictions) a no votes (7 jurisdictions). The motion carried. March 18, 1974: The motion was made to approve language amendments to Initial Coastline Plan: Tia Juana Flood Plain Recommendation. The motion ca on majority vote. The weighted vote was called by the County of San Diego, Escondido, and the of San Diego. The resulting vote was 25 yes votes (9 jurisdictions) and 74 no 7 (4 jurisdictions) Since the no vote did not meet the minimum requirement entities, the motion to approve prevailed. The motion was then made to recon the amendment and failed. The weighted vote was called by Vista, Escondido the County of San Diego, resulting in 76 yes votes (5 jurisdictions) 23 no vot jurisdictions) and 1 abstaining (1 jurisdiction) January 20, 1975: A motion was made to conditionally approve the Tr Implementation Program Policy Statements to be Included in the Proposed Reg Transportation Plan. A substitute motion was then made to accept the report for distribution and c action. That motion failed and the weighted vote was called by the City of tions) Since the minimum required to pass is 5 jurisdictions with 51 weighted VI the substitute motion failed. The original motion subsequently carried. February 24, 1975: The following actions related to the San Diego Plan fox Transportation. 0 Diego, La Mesa and Vista resulting in 48 yes (5 jurisdictions) and 52 no (9 juri: 4D e o Adopt an independent ground operations option at the Otay Mesa location as the appropriate site for the region's air carrier airport. The motion failed on roll call vote. The weighted vote was requested by the City of San Diego, National City, and the County of San Diego resulting in 47 yes votes (4 jurisdictions) and 53 no votes (10 jurisdictions) and motion failed. Locate Lindbergh Field and relocate the major air carrier facility at the Miramar site. The motion failed on roll call vote and the weighted vote was requested by Oceanside, County of San Diego, and Carlsbad resulting in 35 yes votes (4 jurisdictions) and 65 no votes (10 jurisdictions) and motion failed. Retain Lindbergh Field as the major air carrier facility. Motion carried on roll call vote and the weighted vote was requested by City of San Diego, Coronado, and El Cajon resulting in 51 yes votes (10 jurisdictions) and 49 no votes (4 jurisdictions). Motion to retain Lindbergh Field prevailed. o o February 24, 1975: The weighted vote action related to the National Mass Trans- portation Act of 1974 and discussion regarding a "recipient" whose responsibility would be to coordinate necessary functions for the region. The motion was made and carried on roll call vote to support the designation of CPO (SANDAG) as recipient. The weighted vote was requested by the City of San Diego, the County of San Diego and Vista resulting in a weighted vote of 17 yes votes (7 jurisdictions), 77 no votes (5 jurisdictions), 3 absent (1 jurisdiction), and 3 abstaining (1 jurisdiction). The motion failed followed by a request for further study. March 17, 1975: The following weighted votes pertained to elements of the Regional Transportation Plan. A motion to continue certain items in the Transit Element failed on roll call vote. The weighted vote was requested by City of $an Diego, National City and Coronado resulting in 52 yes votes (6 jurisdictions) and 48 no votes (8 jurisdictions). The motion to continue carried. Under the Aviation Element, the motion to rescind action taken in February to adopt Lindbergh Field as the major air carrier facility failed on roll call vote. The City of San Diego, Escondido, and La Mesa requested the weighted vote resulting in 53 yes votes (6 jurisdictions) and 47 no votes (8 jurisdictions) and the motion carried. The motion was then made to retain Lindbergh Field as the major air carrier site for the San Diego Region. The motion carried on roll call vote. The City of San Diego, La Mesa, and Del Mar requested the weighted vote resulting in 20 yes votes (8 jurisdictions) and 80 no votes (6 jurisdictions). The motion failed. The next action requiring weighted vote was Bo designate the Otay Mesa site as the the commercial air carrier facility and retain Lindbergh Field only until the Otay City of San Diego, Oceanside, and La Mesa called for the weighted vote resulting in 56 yes votes (7 jurisdictions) and 44 no votes (7 jurisdictions). The motion carried. Following that action, the motion was made to adopt aviation policies related to Mesa site and new facility could be constructed, Motion failed on tie vote. The 2 * e the Otay Mesa site with an amendment. The motion failed and the weighted was called by the City of San Diego, La Mesa, and Oceanside resulting in 5( votes (7 jurisdictions) and 44 no votes (7 jurisdictions). The motion to adopt pol e as amended carried. July 21, 1975: A motion was made and carried to oppose SI3 101 unless amend provide that CPO as Regional Transportation Planning Agency retain full resp bility for long range systems planning. The City of San Diego, Coronado, ar Mesa requested the weighted vote resulting in 50 yes votes (9 jurisdictions) ai no votes (5 jurisdictions). The motion failed lacking the required majority vo 5 1. Motion to approve certain recommendations regarding the FY76 budget fail( roll call vote. La Mesa, City of San Diego, and National City called fo weighted vote which also failed on a vote of 50 yes (5 jurisdictions) and 50 jurisdictions). October 13, 1975: The Major Airport Facility Site was the subject of the follc actions: Motion to rescind the designation of Otay Mesa as a major airport facility a designate Lindbergh Field as the site for the foreseeable future carried on rol resulting in 52 yes votes (9 jurisdictions), 47 no votes (4 jurisdictions) with 1 a (1 jurisdiction). The motion was then made to discontinue further studies of Otay Mesa except already committed. The motion carried. The City of San Diego, Oceanside Del Mar called for the weighted vote resulting in 46 yes votes (7 jurisdiction, no votes (5 jurisdictions), with 1 absent (1 jurisdiction) and 3 abstaining (1 Jur tion). The motion failed not meeting the minimum 51 vote requirement. January 26, 1976: The motion to endorse the San Diego Coastal Acquisitior failed on roll call vote. That was followed by a motion to reconsider and to the List with several deletions. The motion carried on roll call vote. The C of San Diego, Del Mar, and El Cajon called for the weighted vote resulting in 2 votes (9 Jurisdictions) and 78 no votes (5 jurisdictions). Therefore the moti adopt with deletions failed. The motion was then made to adopt the completc The motion failed on roll call vote. El Cajon, City of San Diego, and County c Diego called for the weighted vote resulting in 78 yes votes (5 jurisdictions) a vote. The City of San Diego, Coronado, and La Mesa called for the weighted e no votes (9 jurisdictions), Therefore the motion to adopt the entire list carriec April 19, 1976: Several amendments to an MTDB-CPO Memorandui Understanding were recommended and the motion was made to adopt the MOL conditions. That motion failed. The City of San Diego, Imperial Beach National City called for the weighted vote resulting in 51 yes votes (6 jurisdict 46 no votes (9 jurisdictions), and 3 abstaining (1 jurisdiction). The motion carri June 26, 1987: Rt. 52 East (Santo Road to SR 67) Draft Environmental 11 Statement was the subject of this request for weighted vote. The motion was to take no action on the selection of a SANDAG preferred route lo( alternative. The motion failed. The County of San Diego, Del Mar, and San M requested the weighted vote resulting in 72 yes votes (8 jurisdictions) and 3 e w e votes (10 jurisdictions) with 2 absent (1 jurisdiction). Therefore the motion to take no action on the site location carried. SANDAG's Conflict Resolution Procedure 1. Local government agencies involved in an interjurisdictional conflict which seemingly cannot be resolved among the agencies may through formal action of their policy body request review of the dispute by SANDAG. The requests shall be forwarded by the local agencies to the SANDAG Chairman, and shall describe the issue(s) for which review is requested. The Chairman shall decide whether mediation can appropriately be carried out by SANDAG. The Chairman shall appoint an ad hoc committee made up of two (2) SANDAG Board members to assist the affected agencies in resolving the conflict. If the request is made by less than all the involved agencies, the other affected agency or agencies will be notified by the SANDAG Chairman of the request and encouraged to participate in the conflict resolution process through formal action of their policy body. The approval from each agency shall be forwarded by the local agency to the SANDAG Chair man. When each affected agency has agreed to the review, the SANDAG Ad Hoc Committee shall meet with the affected agencies to review the nature and scope of the conflict and to request all necessary information. 4. After collection of information and review in consultation with the affected agencies, the SANDAG Ad Hoc Committee shall prepare preliminary findings and recommendations on the conflict issues and forward such preliminary findings and recommendations to the affected agencies for review. The SANDAG Ad Hoc Committee shall again meet with the affected agencies for the purposes of reviewing the preliminary findings and recommendations and achieving agreement on conflict resolution. The SANDAG Ad Hoc Committee shall then prepare the final findings and advisory recommendations, which shall be presented to the affected agencies for further review. If, at this point in the procedure, agreement has been reached among all affected agencies, the process shall be deemed completed and a final report shall be submitted to the SANDAG Board. 2. 3. 5. 6. 7. 8. If at any time because of changed circumstances further review is necessary, any affected agency may ask the SANDAG Chairman to reconsider the findings or recommendations. 4