The URL can be used to link to this page

Home My WebLink About2000-07-17; Parks & Recreation Commission; 700-6; Proposition 12-_ ~ ~ PARKS & RECREATION COMMISSION - AG€NDA BILL I AB# 700-6 TITLE: PROPOSITION 12 INFO MTG. DATE: 7/17/00 (SAFE NEIGHBORHOOD PARKS, CLEAN WATER, STAFF: BEVERLY RECOMMENDED ACTION: Receive staff report on anticipated funding allocation from Proposition 12. Discuss accordingly. ITEM EXPLANATION: CLEAN AIR, AND COASTAL PROTECTION) 0 ACTION In March 2000, the California voters approved Proposition 12, the Safe Neighborhood Parks, Clean Water, Clean Air, and Coastal Protection Bond Act. In essence, it is a 2.1 billion dollar park Bond Act that will provide funds for all the State agencies, which protect land, and recreational resources for future generations, and also makes grants available to local Agencies, which perform the same functions. The Bond Act gives greatest emphasis to urbanized areas, including funding for urban conservation corps, recreation for at-risk youth, and open space protection in fast growing areas and protection of remaining wildlife. The Bond Act is divided into more than a dozen categories, or specific programs. Several of these programs such as the Per-Capita & Roberti Z-Berg Grant is a guaranteed funding program for qualifying projects in which the amount of money received by each applicant city is based upon the towns population. Other programs and grant awards are competitive in which individual projects are vying against each other for available funds. Staff will update the Commission as to anticipated funding which will be available through the Per Capita programs and will identify the various competitive categories and other available grant programs. EXHIBITS: I. CPRS Article - Spring 2000 “2.1 Billion Available Creating Opportunities For Parks, Facilities, Programs And Acquisition” 037 PR~POSITION 12 4 - $2.1 Billion Available Creating Opportunities - For Parks, Facilities, Programs And Aquisition ' -..&g& 63% of Californians showed their support of state and local parks on March py()rositl()a:B 7* by passing Proposition 12, the largest state park bond in the history of the SAFE NEIGHB cLEANwAm2.eCTAN United States. At a press conference on March 9*, Governor Davis stated "I All, AND co PROTECTION *c~o.E;~ooO want to thank the voters of California for thinking big. These measures not only represent the largest park and water bonds in our state's history, but the ultimate triumph of the politics of consensus over the politics of conflict." Proposition 12, authored by Assembly Speaker Antonio Villaraigosa and As- sembly Speaker Pro Tem Fred Keeley, is the first park bond to be passed in 12 years. It will provide $2.1 billion for protection and restoration of California's most precious resources - water, rivers, beaches, air and parks. Proposition 12 provides nearly $1 billion in per capita, competitive and direct & grants to local park and recreation agencies. The breakdown of funding within By Jane H. Adams Proppsition 12 is: Per Capita . $554 million CPRS Executive Director Per capita $338 million Per capita I1 ' $ 50 million Roberti-Z'berg-Harris Program $166 million Within the per capita program 60% of the funds are allocated to cities and districts, other than a regional park district, regional park and open space district 30 SPRING 2000 CALIF 038 EXHIBIT I I. I PROPOSITION 12 + or regional open space district; mini- mum grant is $30,000; 40% of the funds are allocated to counties and regional park district, regional park and open space district or regional open space district; minimum grant is $150,000. Eligible projects are acqui- sition, development, improvement, rehabilitation, restoration, enhance- ment and interpretation of local park and recreation lands and facilities. The per capita I1 program is for cities and districts in urbanized coun- ties (200,000 or higher in population) providing park and recreation services within jurisdictions of200,OOO or less. Eligible projects are acquisition, devel- opment, improvement, rehabilitation, restoration, enhancement and inter- pretation of local park and recreation lands and facilities. The Robcrti-Z'bcrg-Harris pro- gr;~m, provides grants for acquisition, development, rehabilitation, and res- toration of park and recreation areas and facilities and for innovative recre- ' ation programs and special major maintenance. Eighty-three percent of the funds are for block grants to cit- ies, counties, and districts in urbanized areas and Federally recognized Cali- fornia Indian tribes. Sixty percent of the block grants goes to cities and dis- tricts and 40% of the funds goes to counties and regional districts. The remaining 17% of the program is 1 awarded on a competitive basis, with the majority going to cities, counties, I and districts in non-urbanized areas. 1 Proposition 12 also contained nu- 1 merous competitive grant programs: 1 Riparian/Riverine Habitat I program $10 million Non-motorized trails $7.2 million i Murray-Hayden Urban ~ program $100 million Zoos and museums $8 midion National Marine I ~ Sanctuaries $500,000 Urban Recreation & Cultural Centers $8 million Regional Youth Soccer/ Baseball Facilities $1 5 million Locally administrated state park units $20 million California Heritage Fund $10 million Finally, Proposition 12 contained $57 million in specifically named projects. Greater detail on Proposition 12 can be found on the Internet at www.parks.ca.gov. A section has been designated for Proposition 12. Indi- viduals can also write the Department's Communications Office, California State Parks, P.O. Box 942896, Sacra- mento, CA 94296. The State Department of Parks 8E Recreation's Local Services Division is responsible for preparing the criteria and regulations for the competitive grant programs that are funded via Proposition 12. The State Office of .. Environmental Planning City & Regional Planning Park Design and Planning 600 Fremont Avenue South Pasadena, CA 91030 626/799-7187 32 SPRING 2000 CALIFORNIA PARKS & RECREATION 033 PROPOSITION 12 + I Historic Preservation will develop the guidelines for the California Heritage Fund program and the Integrated ’ Waste Management Board is respon- sible for the guidelines for the play- ground replacement program. Of immediate concern to local park and recreation agencies is when the Proposition 12 funds will be available. At the recent 2000 California and Pa- cific Southwest Recreation and Park Training Conference, Ode1 King, Manager, State Department of Parks & Recreation, Local Services Section, led a session titled, “Proposition 12 - Here Comes the Money,” answered - 11 aqencies receive their per ns? nguage calls for the per ition to occur in FY hs assuming the State Department of Parks and Recreation has secured the necessary staffing by July 2000. cent US Census Bureau Intimnation to determine per capita allocation. Local agencies ha\r until .April 2001 to determine and resol\.e ovcrlapplns i boundaries when there arc cines and districts. There are 100 special clistrlcts within the state. ompetitive grant ment’s Local Services ’ preparing the criteria ~ for the competitive grants programs administered- b!, the department. It is anticipated this pro- cess will begin in JLII? 2000 and appli- cation deadlines will be staggered throughout the FY 01 /02. Sonic grants require nomination b!. a state legislator. ding programs can Indian es can only apply for programs. They are ck grants as identi- fied in Proposition 12. projects as long as the project meets the established cri- teria. ent will use the defi- zed” and “non-ur- by the US Census Bureau. ng will agencies have to ject funded by Propo- 3ve 8 years to finish a project -m&d by Proposition 12 Agenci&are &muraged to announce to their publics what projects will be funded by Proposition 12. During the project’s construction or rehabilitation process, agencies are encouraged to place signs indicating the project is funded v~a Prop 12. This will ensure the voter5 xc atvnre that Prop 12 funds are being used locally. 3 &-:.. i& . y-a 2 AI!. aienc!. needs to acquire land. h~t Props12 hnds cm be used for a:&+cii,n?-. I _; ... “ -3 ..“ *-. Acc~~us~t~on L\ allo\ved under thc per caplta program. per caplta I1 program, Kobcrtl-Z’Kerg-H3rris program, and numerous competitive programs for specific npcs of projects (nun-motor- ized trils. nparian/ri\wine habitat) a rately need funds for main- hance & personnel. Can Prop 12 sdnne Prc r maintenance or per- cannot be used for on-going maintenance and personnel costs. Within the per capita, per capita I1 and Roberti-Z’berg-Harris pro- gram, hnds can be used for rehabili- tation and restoration that could re- duce the overall maintenance costs of the agency. e Regional Youth Soc- Facilities competitive warded? Can funds be Th& a mompetitive program therefore, grant criteria and regulations will be written in Fl’ 00/01 through a public process administered by the department’s Local Services Section. Agencies are reminded that priority 1 shall be given to projects that utilize existing school facilities or recreation ~ facilities and that serve disadvantaged ~ youth. The program calls for facilities ’ to be operated by non-profit organi- zations, however public agencies may 1 also apply I CPRS joined a coalition of national ’ (Nature Conservancy, Trust for Pub- ’ lic Lands, and the Sierra Club) and ~ state organizations (Planning and ~ Conservation League) to educate the i voters about the importance ofPropo- ~ sitions 12 and 13. Led by Paul , Romero, Santa Clar,l County, the 1 CPK!! Proposition 12 Task Force was 1 instrumental in organizing over 30 i meetings throughout the state at- 1 tended by local policy makers, envi- , ronmental leaders, and community organizations. The Southern Califor- ni.1 effh \vas led b!, Phil Hester, Long Bench Lkpartment of Parks, Recre- ation and Marinc. The Xorthern Cali- tornin effort \vas led by Pat O’Brien, East Bay Regional Park District and Bob Overstreet, Overstreet & Associ- ’ atcs. In addition, Dick Barbar, Com- missioner, Carmichael Recreation & Park District, led the involvement of the California Association of Park & 34 SPRING 2000 CALIFoRN8du ARKS & RECREATION Recreation Commissioners and Board Members. The following individuals greatly assisted at the CPRS dis- -- trict level organizing the many local informational meetings: District I Fran Brigman County of Marin Parks District I1 Ron Suter County of Sacramento District 111 : Pat O'Brien East Bay Regional Park District . District IV Mary Burns County of San Mateo District VI Gary Davis City of Salinas Dissict VI11 Pete Jenny San Luis Obispo County District IX Greg Johnson City of El Segundo District X Phil Hester City of Long Beach District XI George Price City of Moreno Vallc!. District XI1 Anne Rast County of San Diego District XI11 Don Allen City of Walnut District XIV Shannon Hawley-Omessi Ci? of Glendale 1 In addition to partic~pating In the public inforrna- tional campaign, CPRS contributed to the fund rais- ing campaign for Proposition 12. Led by Gerard \.an Stevn, Shih Consulting Inc., o\w SS0,OOO \vas con- tributed by individual members, sustaining members, and many cornmunit). based organizations and park foundations. CPRS especially appreciates the lcader- ship of Miracle Recreation u.ho Icd the CPRS Sur- taining Member contributions b!, issuing J. challcngc of all Sustaining Members to match their contribu- tion of$2,000. CPRS also recognizes thc Ca1iti)rnia Association of RecreatIon and Park Districts fc)r mak- ing the largest single donation of S 10,000. - All AlUMlNUM OUTDOOR SEATING RAILING SYSTEMS 13fl ALUMOWUM SEAUIIHC, OK. P.O. Box 3310 San Bernardino, CA 92413 CALIFORNIA PARKS & RECREATION SPRING 2000 04i 35 San Diego County These projects are designated exclusively for this county. Project Amount Non-native plant species remOVd 2,000,000 Creek and fish restoration - San Diego County 800,000 county Per Capita Allocation 45,987,249 r/ (click here forspgific.allocations_ to.cjti.its) p // The table below lists categories within the Park Bond and the funding levels for each category. This county will be able to compete for the money in each of these categories. .. Category Amount Playground Equipment upgrades in State Park Recreation Areas 650,000 Archaelogical site protection within a State Park 5,000,000 Natural and Cultural Resource Stewardship Projects 18,000,000 State Park Facilities administered by local agencies 20,000,000 Agricultural Land Stewardship Project 25,000,000 Murray-Hayden Urban Parks and Youth Service program 100,000,000 California Heritage Fund 10,000,000 Lake, river, and reservoir access 10,000,000 Non-motorized trail access 8,225,000 Regional youth soccer and baseball facilities 15,000,000 Zoos, museums, aquariums, and wildlife education 16,250,000 Grants for disadvantaged youth community conservation corps 12,500,000 State Beaches 1,000,000 State Conservation Corps 2,500,000 Ancient redwoods and oak woodlands 13,000,000 L/ Property acquisition in conjunction with Natural Community Conseivation Plans 100,000,000 Wetlands restoration 5,000,000 Coastal areas, fish and wildlife 33,100,000 Riparian and watershed lands 10,000,000 Threatened and endangered species 40,000,000 Coastal Trail 5,000,000 Wildlife Conservation Partnership projects 82,500,000 Waterfowl habitat projects 5,000,000 Wildlife area improvement projects 5,000,000 L' Playground safety projects - - ?hi S 7,000,000 http://www.safeparks.org/countyfimding/sandiego.html 4/26/00 c)42 EXHIBIT 2 Funcling Nlocatlons oy Lounry Urban Forestry grants and projects State parks projects ,- Volunteer Facility Projects http://www. safeparks. org/countyfbnding/sandiego. html 043 10,000,000 465,500,000 4,000,000 4/26/00 rc DRAFT Prop 12 Estimates of Per-Capita Grants Programs DRAFT For planning purposes only. 00 The populations for districts are not available. Agency eligibility and overlapping popubtionS will be determined Spring of 2001. 11111999 Populdon &+ ’ w ’ P”. II AW=Y ESUMt.8 Ra Ikrull C16ks 1d.1 Rate- AlbcatiDn Rate- Albcabion Rate- Albcation SAN DIEGO COUNTY JcARLseAD CHULA VISTA 77,880 $3.90 5256,080 $6.25 5485.oOO $2.70 5209.520 166.900 $3.30 $55O.T70 $6.25 $l,W3,125 $2.70 W0.630 %2,W4.525 $950,600 DEL MAR 5.325 $3.30 $17572 $6.25 533,281 $2.70 $14,378 $351,575 EL WON 95,500 53.30 5315.150 $6.25 t596.875 $2.70 $257.850 31,169,875 $65,231 ENClNlTAS 60.400 $3.30 5199.320 $6.25 S3T1.500 $270 5163.080 ESCONDIDO 125,600 $3.30 $414,480 $6.25 $785.000 $2.70 $339.120 $1.538.600 $739.900 IMPERIAL BEACH 28,900 $3.30 $95,370 $6.25 $180.625 $2.70 $78.030 LA MESA $354.025 58,700 $3.30 $193,710 $6.25 $366.675 $2.70 $158.490 LAKE CUYAMACA R.P.D. SO $6.25 SO $2.70 so $719,075 LEMON GROVE 25,700 $3.30 $84,810 $6.25 $160,625 $2.70 $69.390 $0 NATIONAL CIM 5314,825 OCEANSIDE 55,OOO $3.30 $181.500 $6.25 $343.750 $2.70 5148.500 157.900 $3.30 $521,070 $6.25 5986.875 $2.70 $426.330 $1.934.275 $673.750 POWAY 48.400 $3.30 $159.720 $6.25 5302.500 $2.70 $130.680 SAN DIEGO $592.900 SAN DIEGO COUNTY 1.254.300 $5.15 $6,459,645 $6.25 $7,839,375 2.853.300 $2.20 $6,277,260 $4.00 $11,413,200 $0 $14.299.020 SAN MARCOS 52.100 $3.30 $171.930 $6.25 $325,625 $2.70 $140,670 $0 $17,690,460 SANTEE 57,400 $3.30 $189,420 $6.25 $358.750 $2.70 $154.980 $638.225 SOLANA BEACH 14.150 $3.30 $46,695 $6.25 $88,438 $2.70 $38,205 $703.150 SPRING VALLEY R.P.D. $3.30 SO $6.25 30 $2.70 SO so $173,338 VAUEY CENTER C.S.D. $0 $6.25 So $2.70 SO so VISTA 84,400 $3.30 $278,520 $6.25 $527.500 $2.70 $227.880 $1,033,900 County Total $45,987,249 CORONADO 28.700 $3.30 594.710 $6.25 5179,375 $2.70 $77,490 SAN FRANCISCO COUNTY SAN FRANCISCO 790.500 $5.15 $4,071.075 $6.25 $4,940,625 SAN FRANCISCO COUNTY 790.500 S1.70 $1,343,850 $4.00 s3,162,000 $0 $9.01 1,700 SO $4.505,850 County Total $13.517.550 SAN JOAQUIN COUNTY ESCALON 5.725 $0 $6.25 $35.781 $2.70 $15,458 LATHROP 9.525 $51.239 LODl 56.900 $3.30 $187.770 $6.25 $355.625 $2.70 $153.630 $0 $6.25 $59,531 $2.70 825.710 $85.249 MANTECA 48.050 $0 $6.25 $300.312 $2.70 $129.735 8697,025 RIPON $430,047 10.000 $0 $6.25 $62.500 $2.70 $27.000 SAN JOAQUIN COUNTY 554.400 $1.70 $942.480 $4.00 $2.217.600 $69,500 STOCKTON 243.700 $3.30 $804.210 $6.25 $1,523,125 SO $3.160.080 $0 $2.327.335 TRACY 50 .300 SO $6.25 $314,375 $2.70 $135.810 $450.185 County Total $7.290.660 SAN LUIS OBlSPO COUNTY ARROYOGRANDE ATASCADERO 16.000 $0 $6.25 $100.000 $2.70 $43.200 25.450 $0 $6.25 $159.062 $2.70 $68.715 $143,200 EL PAS0 DE ROBLES 22.500 $227s777 GROVER BEACH 12,650 $0 $6.25 $140,625 $2.70 $60,750 $0 $6.25 $79.062 $2.70 $34,155 $201,375 MORRO BAY 9.875 $0 $6.25 $61,719 $2.70 $26,662 $1 13,217 PISMO BEACH 8.475 $88.381 SAN LUIS OBlSPO $0 $6.25 $52.969 $2.70 $22,882 42.850 $3.30 5141.405 $6.25 $267.812 $2.70 $115,695 $75.851 SAN LUIS OBlSPO 241.600 $1.70 $410.720 $4.00 $966,400 $524,912 $0 $1,377,120 County Total 92,751,833 California State Parks - Local Services Section [ 1999-1 2-1 51 Page 11 044 Bene,fits for Neighborhood Parks http://www.safeparks.org/parks.html , - Safe Neighborhood Parks, Clean Water, Clean Air, and Coastal Protection Bond Act of 2000 Benefits for Neighborhood Parks $388 million for the acquisition, development, improvement, rehabilitation, restoration enhancement, and interpretation of local park and recreational lands and facilities, including renovation of recreational facilities conveyed to local agencies resulting from the downsizing or decommissioning of federal military installations. Funds will be distributed as grants to counties, cities, regional park districts, regional park and open-space districts on the basis of population, in accordance with Sections 5096.332, 5096.333, and 5096.336 of the bond act. $200 million for the acquisition, development, rehabilitation, and restoration of park and recreation areas and facilities pursuant to the Roberti-Z'berg-Harris Urban Open-Space and Recreational Program Act. Funds will be distributed as grants to cities, counties, and districts. $100 million for park, youth center, and environmental enhancement projects that benefit youth in areas that lack safe neighborhood parks, open space, and natural areas, and that have significant poverty. Priority shall be given to capital projects that employ neighborhood residents and at-risk youth. The funds will be distributed as grants to public agencies and F nonprofit organizations. $15 million for regional youth soccer and baseball facilities operated by nonprofit organizations. Priority shall be given to those projects that utilize existing school facilities or recreational facilities and serve disadvantaged youth. $15 million for the rehabilitation, restoration, or enhancement of Golden Gate Park. $1 0 million for the development, improvement, rehabilitation, restoration, and enhancement of nonmotorized trails. Included in this are $1.5 million for the completion of a project that links existing bicycle and pedestrian trail systems to major urban public transportation systems in Whittier, $275,000 to the East Bay Regional Park District for the completion of the Iron Horse Trail, and $1.5 million for the completion of a bike trail in Concord. $7 million for improving and replacing playground equipment or facilities. Funds will be distributed as grants to local agencies to assist them in meeting state and federal accessibility standards. 1of1 1/14/2000 8:05 AM Programs for At-Risk Youth http://www.safeparks.org/atrisk.html - Safe Neighborhood Parks, Clean Water, Clean Air, and Coastal Protection Bond Act of 2000 Programs for At-Risk Youth The Per Capita Program provides $388 million in grants to cities, counties and special districts. Sections 5096.310(f), 5096.332, 5096.333, and 5096.336 of the bond act govern these grants. $338 million are available to cities, counties and special districts, with a minimum of $30,000 to cities and districts and $1 50,000 for counties. These grants are for the acquisition, development, improvement, rehabilitation, restoration, enhancement, and interpretation of local park and recreational lands and facilities. Included in this is the renovation of recreational facilities conveyed to local agencies resulting from the downsizing or decommissioning of federal and military installations. Among the purposes these projects are to accomplish are developing facilities that promote positive alternatives for youth and that promote cooperation between local park and recreation providers and youth-serving nonprofit organizations. In addition, within Los Angeles County, not less than 20 percent of the funds available through this program will be used for land acquisition, construction, development and rehabilitation of at-risk youth recreation facilities. The Roberti-Z'berg-Harris Urban Open-Space and Recreational Program provides $200 million in grants to cities, counties and special districts. Section 5620 of the Public Resources jurisdictions that are urbanized or heavily urbanized. The remainder of the funds is awarded on a competitive basis, with the majority of the competitive funds going to non-urbanized jurisdictions. Among the purposes these projects are to accomplish are developing facilities that promote positive alternatives for youth and that promote cooperation between local park and recreation providers and youth-serving nonprofit organizations. The Murray-Hayden Urban Parks and Youth Service Program provides $100 million in grants to public agencies and nonprofit organizations. Sections 5096.310 (j) and 5096.348 of the bond act govern these grants. This program specifically targets neighborhoods that have been identified as having a critical lack of park or open space lands or deteriorated facilities, that are in an area of significant poverty and unemployment, and that have a shortage of services for youth. Priority will be given to capital projects that employ neighborhood residents and at-risk youth. The Department of Parks and Recreation provides $15 million in grants to nonprofit organizations for regional youth soccer and baseball facilities. Section 5096.310 (I) (2) of the bond act governs these grants. Priority shall be given to grant projects that serve disadvantaged youth. The California Conservation Corps provides $12.5 million in grants to certified local community conservation corps to complete capital outlay and resource conservation projects. Section 5096.310 (s) of the bond act governs these grants. The mission of the corps is to develop youth through work, service, empowerment and education. - Code governs these grants. 83% of the funds are provided as block grants (per capita) to - 1 of1 1/14/2000 8:05 AM Benepts for Urban Areas http://www.safeparks.org/urbanareas.html - Safe Neighborhood Parks, Clean Water, Clean Air, and Coastal Protection Bond Act of 2000 Benefits for Urban Areas The Per Capita Program provides $388 million in grants to cities, counties and special districts. Sections 5096.310(f), 5096.332, 5096.333, and 5096.336 of the bond act govern these grants. $338 million are available to cities, counties and special districts, with a minimum of $30,000 to cities and districts and $150,000 for counties. These grants are for the acquisition, development, improvement, rehabilitation, restoration enhancement, and interpretation of local park and recreational lands and facilities. Included in this is the renovation of recreational facilities conveyed to local agencies resulting from the downsizing or decommissioning of federal and military installations. The Roberti-Z'berg-Harris Urban Open-Space and Recreational Program provides $200 million in grants to cities, counties and special districts. Section 5620 of the Public Resources Code governs these grants. 83% of the funds are provided as block grants (per capita) to jurisdictions that are urbanized or heavily urbanized. The remainder of the funds is awarded on a competitive basis, with the majority of the competitive funds going to non-urbanized jurisdictions. The Murray-Hayden Urban Parks and Youth Service Program provides $100 million in - grants to public agencies and nonprofit organizations. Sections 5096.310 (j) and 5096.348 of the bond act govern these grants. This program specifically targets neighborhoods that have been identified as having a critical lack of park or open space lands or deteriorated facilities, that are in an area of significant poverty and unemployment, and that have a shortage of services for youth. Priority will be given to capital projects that employ neighborhood residents and at-risk youth. The Clean Air Improvement Program provides $10 million to the Department of Forestry and Fire Protection for urban forestry programs. Section 4799.12 of the Public Resources Code as well as section 5096.310 (u) and 5096.346 of the bond act govern this program. This program provides for the purchase, planting, and up to three years of care, for trees that . provide greater air quality benefits and for urban forestry projects that provide greater energy conservation benefits. The Urban Streams Restoration and Lake Access Program provides $10 million in grants for the improvement or acquisition and restoration of riparian habitat, riverine aquatic habitat, and other lands in close proximity to rivers and streams for river and stream trail projects. Sections 5096.310 (h) and 5096.337 of the bond act, as well as Section 78682.2 and 7048 of the Water Code govern this program. In addition the bond act enumerates many specific individual projects in urban areas throughout the state. Please see the Funding Allocations by County document in the Funding Allocations section of the www.safeparks.org website to review these projects. 1of1 1/14/2000 8:05 AM One Page Summary http://www.safeparks.org/onepage.hhnl PROPOSITION 12 SAFE NEIGHBORHOOD PARKS, CLEAN WATER CLEAN AIR, AND COASTAL PROTECTION BOND ACT Proposition I2 will provide substantial benefits to all Californians. It is aimed at improving the quality of life of every resident, by providing cleaner air and water, recreational opportunities, safe places for children to play, and new wildlife preserves. Proposition 12 is a well balanced proposal. By providing clean fuel vehicles for park equipment, tree planting throughout the state, and by avoiding development which generates air pollution, it will improve air quality. By providing funds for numerous river and stream cleaning and restoration projects, as well as for protecting and improving watershed lands, it will help provide good water quality. By protecting threatened coastal land, it will keep our beautiful coast accessible to the public and free from inappropriate development. Proposition 12 provides substantial funds for safe neighborhood parks, and for programs to give youth safe recreational alternatives to gang, drug, and other inappropriate behavior. It includes funds for youth to participate in conservation corps, and to learn skills which will provide them with later employment opportunities. Programs included in Proposition 12 will benefit every neighborhood in California. Proposition 12 gives heavy emphasis to improving the quality of life in our cities and suburbs. Specific planting urban trees, restoring rivers and streams in our cities, protecting open space, and building new trails between parks. - programs go to making neighborhood parks safer, providing new recreational opportunities, Fish and wildlife programs are provided by Proposition 12. These programs will increase fishing opportunities, protect species threatened by California's rapid development, provide children greater chances to learn about wildlife in zoos and aquaria, and enhance our important commercial fishing industry. Our magnificent State Park System badly needs the funds Proposition 12 will provide to improve visitor facilities, protect old growth redwoods, provide campsites, and make trails safer. All areas of California are treated fairly by Proposition 12. Many of the funds are allocated in proportion to population. It has been twelve years since the last park and wildlife bond act was approved by the voters. Since that time, California has added more than five million people, and they need places to recreate, and for their children to play. Proposition 12 is the latest in a long line of park bond acts dating back to the 1920's. It was placed on the ballot by the Legislature and Governor Davis to improve the quality of life in our state for the next decade. Tremendous leadership was shown by Assembly Speaker Villaraigosa and Speaker Pro Tem Keeley, and by Senators Hayden and Murray. If you'd like to join in the campaign to pass Proposition 12, please contact Bryan Blum at ~.!!~-~~safepBlf~~':,L.PC)~,, or write us at Yes on Proposition 12, 926 J street, #612, Sacramento, -_ - CA 95814, or call Brian at 916-313-4538. 1 of1 1/14/2000 8:03 AM Resolution of Support http://www.safeparks.org/resolution.hhnl DRAFT RESOLUTION OF SUPPORT Proposition 12 Safe Neighborhood Parks, Clean Water, Clean Air, and Coastal Protection Bond Act of 2000 Whereas, California's state, regional, and local parks serve as recreational, social, and cultural centers for California's communities, providing important venues for youth enrichment and safety; community identity, protection of natural and historic sites, parkland and open space, and Whereas, the state's commitment to state, regional, and local parks has dwindled over the last decade thereby California and its communities have not kept pace with the needed funding for rehabilitation, development, and acquisition, and Whereas, during this same period of diminished funding for state, regional and local parks, California's citizens have increased their visits to state and local parks, and Whereas, California is known for its incredible natural resources of open space, mountains, rivers, coastline, and forests that positively impact the state and local economy, Whereas, California is largely an urban state where it is projected the state's population will continue to grow by 18 million by 2020; thereby placing more pressure on existing parkland and facilities, and Whereas, California's economy is dependent upon maintaining a high quality of life that includes attractive and safe public park and recreation facilities and services, and Whereas, the last statewide park bond was passed in 1988, and Whereas, the Safe Neighborhoods Parks, Clean Water, Clean Air, and Coastal Protection Bond Act of 2000 provides $2.1 billion for state and local park projects to preserve our natural heritage and allow urban areas to expand much needed recreation facilities that serve children, youth, seniors, and families, and Therefore, be it resolved, (agency) supports the passage of the Safe Neighborhood Parks, Clean Water, Clean Air, and Coastal Protection Bond Act of 2000, and encourages California voters approve this bond act in March 2000. 1of1 1/14/2000 8:02 AM Statewide Program * http://www.cal-parks.ca.gov/GRANTS/bond2.htm - California State Parks Per Capita Program $338,000,000 less 1.5% for administration $332,930,000 To be allocated Per capita rate Counties and Regional $133,172,000 $4.00 Cities & RPDs $199,758.000 $6.25 Park Districts Does not account for minimum counties ($1 50,000); or .city ($30,000) State Population 1/1/1999 -- 33,777,300 .- 1of1 1/14/2000 8:13 AM Roberti-Z’berg-Harris Program http://www.cal-parks.ca.gov/GRANTS/bond3.htm Per Capita Estimates for Planning Purpose $200,000,000 less 1.5% for administration $197,000,000 Urbanized l(a) Cities & RPDs l(b) Counties and Regional PDs 2(a) Large Cities > 300,000 2(b) Large Counties and Regional PDs >1,000,000 3(a) Non Urbanized needs-basis 3(b) Urbanized needs-basis Per capita rate 3.30 1.70 5.15 2.20 $29,47 1,200 (competitive) $4,018.800 (competitive) Urbanized Area as defined by US Census 1990 (or 2000 Census -- ifcompleted) State Population 1/1/1999 -- 33,777,300 1of1 1/14/2000 8:13 AM