Loading...
Resolution No. 4228 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 29 30 31 32 RESOLUTION NO. 4228 A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF VERNON ENDORSING CERTAIN BASIC CONCEPTS EMBODIED IN THE UNIFIED TRANSPORTATION ASSISTANCE ACT NOW BEING CONSIDERED BY CONGRESS AND URGING CONGRESS TO AMEND THE PROPOSED ACT TO CLARIFY INTENT AND TO PROVIDE A FAIR AND EQUITABLE DISTRIBUTION OF FUNDS THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CI TY OF VERNON RESOLVES AS FOLLOWS: WHEREAS, Congress is considering the enactment of a Unified Transportation Assistance Act to provide for the develop- ment of balanced multi-modal transportation systems; and WHEREAS, the proposed Act would authorize appropriations for each fisca year ending 1978, 1979, and 1980 for Federal-Aid Urban transportation system and an additional Urban Mass Transpor- tion Capital Grant Program; and WHEREAS, effective July 1, 1974, the Federal base share payable for projects on Federal-Aid systems would be raised from 70 percent to 80 percent thereby reducing the State or local government share; and \iJHEREAS, the Unified Transportation Assistance Act would extend the authority of the Secretary of Transportation to certify the states to carry out the necessary environmental and 4(f) reviews and approvals providing the State has a qualified agency; and WHEREAS, there is a need for Congress to clarify its inten and define such terms as Responsible Local Officials in the Fede- ral-Aid Highway Act of 1973; and WHEREAS, Urban and rural programs are of equal importance to the areas they serve, and it is essential that such programs be responsive to the unique needs of their different areas and it is essential that a proper balance be established for funding the programs to meet these needs; and WHEREAS, there is an increasing number of special purpose programs that perpetuate the donor status of California; and WHEREAS, the donor status of California continues to -1- 1 increase as exemplified by the fact that current1ycn1y 60 percent 2 of the Federal Highway Users' Taxes revenues are returned to the 3 State and its local jurisdictions. 4 NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED: 5 SECTION 1: That the City Council of the City of Vernon 6 endorses the concept of 80 percent Federal participation in trans- 7 portation projects, and the delegation of authority to the State 8 to carry out the entire program, including environmental matters 9 as embodied in the proposed Unified Transportation Assistance Act 10 and that Congress is requested to amend the proposed act to 11 clarify its intent and the intent of the Federal-Aid Highway Act 12 of 1973 to define the terms Responsible Local Officials, Appro- 13 priate Local Officials, and Local Bodies as the legislative bodies 14 of cities and counties and by permitting the States and qualified 15 cities and counties to be certified to carry out all phases of the 16 Federally-aided transportation programs. 17 SECTION 2: FURTHER RESOLVED: that Congress be urged to 18 eliminate special purpose programs and return a minimum of 90 19 percent of the revenues generated by a state to that state to 20 reverse the trend of California's increasing subsidation of their 21 transportation systems. 22 SECTION 3: FURTHER RESOLVED: That the City Clerk ot the 23 City of Vernon be instructed to forward copies of this Resolution 24 to the Senators and appropriate Congressment from California, the 25 League of California Cities, and the County Supervisors' Associa- 26 tion of California. 27 SECTION 4: FURTHER RESOLVED: That the City Clerk of the 28 City of Vernon shall certify to the passage of this Resolution 29 and thereupon and thereafter the same shall be in full force and 30 effect. ADOPTED AND APPROVED this 2nd day of April, 1974. A~ F. A. ZIEMER, City Clerk 31 32 -2- << .. .. 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 29 :30 31 32 I I 1 i STATE OF CAL IFORNIA ! 2 3 4 5 6 I 71 ) ) COUNTY OF LOS ANGELES ) ss. I, F. A. ZIEMER, City Clerk of the City of Vernon, do hereby certify that the foregoing resolution, being Resolution N 4.228 o. , was duly adopted by the City Council of the City of Vernon, and approved by the Mayor of said City, at a regular a meeting of the City Council held on April 2, 1974 ~'<;'."..""~ ! J2-'1~ v. . emer, City Clerk WARREN G. MAGNUSON. WASH., CHAIRMAN JOHN O. PASTORE. R.I. NORRIS COTJ"ON, N.H. VANCE HARTKE. IND. JAMES B. PEARSON. KANS. PHILIP A. HART. MICH. ROBERT P. GRIFFIN, MICH. HOWARD W. CANNON. NEV. HOWARD H. BAKER. JR., TENN. RUSSELL B. LONG, LA. MARLOW W. COOK, KY. FRANK E. MOSS. ITfAH TED STEVENS, ALASKA ERNEST F. HOLLINGS. S.C. J. GLENN BEALL, JR,. MD. DANIEL K. INOUYE, HAWAII JOHN V. TUNNEY. CAUF. ADLAI E. STEVENSON III. IlL. ~Cni{e~ ..$tates ..$enate COMMITTEE ON COMMERCE WASHINGTON, D.C. 20510 FREDERICK J. LORDAN, STAFF DIRECTOR MICHAEL PERTSCHUK. CHIEF COUNSEL January 10, 1975 Honorable Leonis C. Malburg Mayor, City of Vernon 4305 Santa Fe Avenue Vernon, California Dear Mayor Malburg: Thank you for the copy of your resolution adopted by the city council concerning the proposed revisions to the Federal Highway Administration's noise standards and procedures on noise level requirements on Federal- aid Systems Projects. I have contacted the Federal Highway Administration and have been informed that they are revising these pro- posed noise standards. Many comments from around the country have been received, and in light of these comments, they are re-evaluating their earlier standards, published in proposed form in the September 10 Federal Register. As the author of the Noise Control Act which has as its aim the alleviation of the noise burden faced by so many of our citizens in California, I concur that high- way and other road noise must be curtailed. This must not occur, however, at a cost too high for our local communities to bear, nor in an impractical, possibly hazardous manner. I appreciate your taking the time to share your concern with me on this matter. You may be sure that the FHWA noise standard will continue ~have my close attention. . . JVT/tfj nator WARREN G. MAGNUSON, WASH., CHAIRMAN JOHN O. PASTORE. R.I. NORRIS COTTON N H VANCE HARTKE, IND. JAMES B. PEARS' ON: ~NS. PHILIP A. HART. MICH. ROBERT P. GRIFFIN. MICH. HOWARD W. CANNON, NEV. HOWARD H. BAKER JR TENN RUSSELL B. LONG. LA. MARLOW W. COOK: KV..' . FRANK E. MOSS, UTAH TED STEVENS ALASKA ERNEST F. HOLLINGS, S.C. J. GLENN BEAU. JR. MD DANIEL K. INOUVE, HAWAII t , . JOHN V. TUNNEY. CALIF. ADLAI E. STEVENSON III, IUe. c c r?-~ ~Cnite;) 's'{a{e$ 's'ena!e COMMITTEE ON COMMERCE WASHINGTON. D.C. 20510 FREDERICK J. LORDAN, STAFF DIRECTOR MICHAEL PERTSCHUK, CHIEF COUNSEL RECEiYED May 13, 1974-~ - / b ~ 7y E. A. ZiEMER - ern CLEFtK Mr. F. A. Ziemer City Clerk City of Vernon, California City Hall 4305 Santa Fe Avenue Vernon, California 90058 Dear Mr. Ziemer: Thank you very much for your comnnmication regarding the Unified Transportation Assistance Act and the Department of Transportation's proposed definition of "responsible local official." I understand the concern expressed in the resolution about the definition. I have contacted the Senate Public Works Committee, to which the pending Unified Transportation Assistance Act has been referred and transmitted to them vour views on this very important matter making Sl..lre they were well aware of the critical issues raised by the proposed definition. I have instructed my staff to closely monitor the action 1-1Thich the Commi ttee takes on the bill checking to see 1.mat course is pur- sued with regard to clarifying the Congressional intent on the meaning of "responsible local official." I have heard from many communities in California endorsing the provision in the bill providing 80 percent federal participation in transportation projects and delegation of authority to the States to carry out the entire program including environmental matters. I have been extremely concerned about California's donor status with regard to Federal Highway User Tax receipts. I directed my staff to inquire into this problem, and we have found that for the 1957-1972 period only nine states had a ratio of payments to receipts that 1<laS poorer than California's. In 1972, for example, for every dollar going out of California to the federal government, only 79 cents ,,,as returned to California. Thank you again for the copy of the re~n. I assure you that I will bear in mind the v~.?r i,t, F~;~~: s~1c elk, I " J. I ' I, ! iJ.li. !~, t~Cw~ -, J U-L"'l . '1.iJNN.t. r ...... United States Senator JVT/npr ~b~r ,i! ~ ,'" -, lP{y~ IJ ~;" t ~ LEaquE OF caliFORnia cC ~ OFFICERS PRESIDENT HAROLD M. HAYES MAYOR, MONTCLAIR FIRST VICE PRESIDENT LEE H. DAVIES MAYOR, MODESTO SECOND VICE PRESIDENT~TREASURER PETE WILSON MAYOR, SAN DIEGO PAST PRES I DENT THOMAS oJ. MELLON cHIEF ADMINISTRATIVE OFFICER SAN FRANCISCO EXECUTIVE DIRECTOR DON BENNINGHOVEN DIRECTORS WILLIAM H. (HARRY) ARMSTRONG COUNCILMAN, CLOVIS NATHANIEL BATES COUNCILMAN, RICHMOND THOMAS BRADLEY MAYOR, LOS ANGELES ROBERT E. BROWNE COUNCILMAN, MILPITAS .JAMES L. DONOHUE DIRECTOR OF RECREATIDN~PARK DEPT. SALINAS THOMAS G. DUNNE CITY MANAGER, WALNUT CREEK MARY W. HENDERSON COUNCILWOMAN, REDWOOD CITY RAYMOND M. HILL FIRE CHIEF, LOS ANGELES TERRY LA CROIX, .JR. MAYOR, ALAMEDA NORMAN .J. LIND DIRECTOR OF PLANNING OAKLAN D GERALD ".JOE" LIVERMORE COUNCILMAN, COLUSA .JACK D. MALTESTER MAYO R, SAN LEAN DRO RICHARD H. MARRIOTT MAYO R, SAC RAM E NTO .JAMES F. MARTINEK DIRECTOR OF PUBLIC WORKS RIVERSIDE DALE C. MITCHELL COUNCILMAN, MORRO BAY RICHARD G. NAGEL COUNCILMAN, EL SEGUNDO ED NORRIS COUNCILMAN, SALINAS ROBERT M. ODELL, .JR. CITY TREASURER, LOS ANGELES .JESS F. PEREZ MAYOR, ORANGE GEND .J. PIN) CHIEF OF POLICE, SANTA CRUZ HELEN PUTNAM MAYOR, PETALUMA EDWARD H. RADEMACHER VICE MAYOR, CALIPATRIA .JOHN H. READING MAYOR, OAKLAND SAMUEL SIEGEL CITY ATTORNEY, ARTESIA, LA PUENTE, PICo RIVERA, WALNUT .JAMES SNAPP MAYOR, EL CA.JoN EDWIN W. WADE MAYOR, LONG BEACH DUANE WINTERS COUNCILMAN, FULLERTON ~" 4l.,v g CitiES SACRAMENTO 95814 . 1108 "0" STREET' (916) 444-5790 BERKELEY 94705 . HOTEL. CL.AREMONT . (415) 843-3083 L.OS ANGELES 90017 . 702 HIL.TON CENTER' (213) 624-4934 Sacramento, CA June 17, 1974 RECEIVED /: -2. 0-7r il> F. A. ZIEMER CITY CLERK F. A. Ziemer City Clerk City Hall Vernon, CA 90058 1974 plrN Dear Ms. Ziemer: We write in connection with a position taken by your city in Resolution No. 4228 and strenuously urge that you reconsider the endorsement of one element of this resolution. The resolution which you adopted was originally suggested by the County Super- visors Association of California and there would be drastic negative consequences for the role of municipal government in transportation decision making if one of the suggestions contained in the document is implemented at the federal level. The only funds under the Federal Aid Highway Act of 1973 which are directly available for use by cities are the "Urban D" appor- tionments. In prescribing the method for distribution of these funds the Act divides regions of urban population into two cate- gories: (1) "Urban areas" and (2) "Urbanized areas". "Urban area" is defined as a place having a population of 5,000 or more and "urbanized area" is defined as an area having a population in excess of 50,000. In California there is approximately $90 million per year available for expenditure under the "Urban D" program. (Also known as the Federal Aid Urban Systems or FAU Program.) The chief difference in allocation procedures under the 1973 Act as opposed to previous legislation is that apportionments are made to "areas" (urbanized or urban) which may include several cities and even more than one county. The act provides that there must be a cooperative process developed in every urban and urbanized area to determine the program for expenditure of the F AU funds. The act further states that such programs shall be developed by "responsible local officials" . F. A. Ziemer June 17, 1974 Page Two The policy positions of the National League of Cities and the U _S. Conference of Mayors are both supportive of the definition of "responsible local officials" pub- lished in the March 11 FEDERAL REGISTER. The County Supervisors Association of California, however, has objected strenuously to the use of the phrase "acting through the area-wide transportation planning organization". They would prefer to have the term defined to mean elected officials of general purpose local govern- ment acting only in their capacities as officials serving in the local legislative bodies to which they are elected, and not as officials of the area-wide planning organization. The ,county definition would have the effect of excluding cities from meaningful input on decisions affecting more than one city. For example, how would cities effectively address the following two principal issues which must be faced in future transportation planning: (1) Modal split - i. e., the amount of highway trust fund dollars which will be redirected to mass transportation facilities on a regional basis, (2) Planning for highway projects of regional significance which would be constructed with FAU dollars to meet regional highway transportation needs? Unfortunately, CSAC and several counties have made sample resolutions available to many cities throughout California which urge the federal government to redefine "responsible local official" to exclude any role for city officials serving on regional transportation planning organizations. Many cities have adopted this resolution as it was drafted by the counties. When viewed alone, the resolution appears to be one which cities should support. However, when viewed in the context of the debate over the definition of "responsible local official", this particular aspect of the resolution should not be endorsed by any city. The League of California Cities I Board of Directors considered the issues in this field at their April meeting and acted to strongly endorse the existing definition of responsible local official as "local officials acting through the appropriate area-wide transportation planning organization" where such definition is interpreted to apply to decisions affecting sub-regional and regional transportation facilities. We respectively urge your city to withdraw or modify the resolution which was passed concerning the Federal Aid Highway Act of 1973. In addition, some cities may feel it appropriate to correspond with Richard Watson, Executive Director, County Supervisors Association of California, 9th & L Building, Sacramento, CA 95814. The principal issue contained in the sample resolution was the definition of "responsible local official" and this issue was not brought to the attention of cities which were asked to act upon this resolution. Most city officials believe that it would have been desirable to have accompanying explanatory material mailed along with the suggested resolution. / F. A. Ziemer June 17, 1974 Page Three Insofar as we are aware, the federal agencies involved in developing the current definition of "responsible local official" have not moved to revise that definition. We do hope, however, that no action in this regard will occur in Congress in con- nection with the new transportation legislation which is being developed at this time. We regret the considerable misunderstanding which has occurred in connection with this issue, and we request cities to correct any previously distributed information which may be incorrect or misleading, Sincerely, / ,~1fY~/ /1 /7)' ,/At:ft; a~t:~ Michael J. Arnold Legislative Representative MJA: vlc Senator Alan Cranston Room 542, 3enate Office Building Washington, D.C. Rep. Edward R. Roybal Rayburn Office Building Room 2404 Washingto:l, D. C, 20515 Rept. Augustus F. Hawkins 2350 Rayburn House Office Bldg., Washington, D.C. 20515 Congresman Don Clawson House of Representatives 2347 Rayburn House Office Bldg. Washinston, D. C. League of Calif. Cities 1108 If Off Street Sacram:.mto, California 95814 County Supervisors Assoc. of Calif 11th and L Bldgs. Suite 201 Sacramento, Calif. C mID ty Road D ept. Warren Herr Senator John Tunney Room 1415, Senate Office Bldg. Washington, D. C. 20510 7110 Federal Building 300 N. Los Angeles Street Los Angeles, Calif. 92012 Field Office 2710 Zoe Avenue Huntington Park, Calif. 902 55 Congressman (Per List) The City of Vernon is deeply concerned with the Department or Transportation's proposal to derine Ii re sponsible loced official s II iJ S some- thing other than loceJly elected officials. DOT ha s entered proposed rules in the March 11, 1974 Federal ?egister vvhich would define" responsible local officials" to be areawide transportation planning org3.nizations - in our ca se, the Southern California As sociation of GO'vcrn:::ents (8 CAG). \^..le do not bel.ie\'8 j,t \^,/as tllS i!Tterlt of Con'JT".:~SS irl usi:1g the' terrn llresporlsi1:d.c3 local officials" in federal h1g"',':ay and trClnsportaticn legislaticI1 to rnean ihat th8 cOfltrol of f~...11id arld prj.c}~'tie3 ShC)l) be rerncy\/ed frs=-:-. thc;E::',c (..)ffjc;.1_cjls cijr 2 ct J~/ E:: J c: C:LL': d a n,,,l d11 l,',' (;tly r :_: ~: }-)'(jll Ie t.) t.}Jcit c<)rlE;tit-u~.=--.:.': s. ;)[C;..~. .! IJ)/ I)()J appears ~')n page 9522 c,f J !=:.t;:' stefj \lc)lu.fL9 :>0 J T"~~)fl 48, clDt'::~(l f\,'Ioflda,Y I r'v'Tar(~h 11, 1974. I'(l'~:: key defi i-~_-;r)rl tC) \vhi.c}-~ ':/,:8 ject is COlltc'2 in fhe:: sc~con,:j })Clrrl(Jrc~ph lJrlclc:- Part 47C IS' :-_;:_:rt p" ():'i. t~lat r~~;o. Th2 City Council of __V~r1l.on .,_...... directed n,e to forward to YO'.1 the att3chec1 resolutiun (md ur~)cfltly requests that you tcke ulJ action pc,s~jbic; to b~ing aL)c)~Jt th(.i \vitlldr::'~':,'\70J ()f tl'lr~ .L prOl)I)Sdl ~ \~/8 lJrqc: }J()U tCi ~'jursl.~C C.1rl arn;-?r~ci- ~1E'rltto ritle !~:~~I L\J.ute(13LdLE~~ C0d_e, tL~) (.jell. dciil1Jn~~ t}-18 tc'rr(l '\re~sporlsil)le lc)cal cf.fic:i=]~lj tr~~? cjt.i,E.:~' and C()"dntjes. . , _, _~,'. r ....-... _ . _ _, " _. 1 ~ _ . lJ 1 t~ .'- j:. Lt=:::: r 1 ,!., ',,- J.L '-~. '_J"; .::! ~ '::: ,') ~". i.;.r ;C'~; the 1e::;~: J :i vc , - .:0; sell Yours very truly, F. A. Ziemer City Clerk