|
|
|
|
|
|
COUNTY OF SAN MATEO
Inter-Departmental Correspondence
|
County Manager’s Office
|
|
|
DATE:
|
August 7, 2007
|
BOARD MEETING DATE:
|
August 14, 2007
|
SPECIAL NOTICE/HEARING:
|
None
|
VOTE REQUIRED:
|
Majority
|
|
|
TO:
|
Honorable Board of Supervisors
|
FROM:
|
John Maltbie, County Manager
|
SUBJECT:
|
County Manager’s Report #11
|
|
|
A.
|
Resolution in support of SCA 12 (Torkalson and Yee), Stormwater and Urban Runoff Service Fees
|
|
|
RECOMMENDATION:
|
Adopt a resolution in support of SCA 12 (Torkalson and Yee), Stormwater and Urban Runoff Service Fee.
|
|
|
VISION ALIGNMENT:
|
Commitment: Ensure basic health and safety for all
|
Goal(s): 5—Maintain and enhance the public safety for all.
|
|
|
Passage of SCA 12 (Torkalson and Yee) would facilitate local government’s ability to impose or increase fees for stormwater improvements and urban runoff management and reduce the risk of flooding in areas with inadequate stormwater collection facilities.
|
|
|
BACKGROUND:
|
The California Constitution, with the exception of fees or charges for sewer, water, and refuse collection services, conditions the imposition or increase of a property-related fee or charge upon approval by either a majority vote of the owners of the properties subject to the fee or charge or, at the option of the agency imposing the fee or charge, by a 2/3 vote of the voters residing in the area affected by the fee or charge. This measure would additionally exclude fees and charges for stormwater and urban runoff management from these approval requirements for the imposition or increase of a property-related fee or charge.
|
|
|
DISCUSSION:
|
Increasingly strict regulation of pollutants from stormwater and urban runoff has significantly increased the costs to local agencies responsible for controlling pollutants that can contaminate drinking water, despoil beaches, and endanger public health. Local agencies find themselves caught between the need to expend large amounts of money on stormwater runoff management and Proposition 218's prohibitively high requirements for approving fees to fund those efforts.
|
|
|
SCA 12 would essentially provide the same procedures for imposing or increasing charges for stormwater management improvements as those currently used for sewer, water, and solid waste fees, i.e., providing notice of the fee imposition or increase not less than 45 days prior to the Board holding a public hearing to consider protests. If a majority protest is received, the fee could not be imposed.
|
|
|
The Midcoast Stormwater Drainage Committee established by the Board has begun meeting and is in the process of identifying areas that are subject to frequent flooding. Passage of SCA 12 would facilitate establishment of fees to fund stormwater system improvements both on the coast and throughout the County and State.
|
|
|
Opposition to the bill comes from groups opposed to facilitating collection of property related fees by government.
|
|
|
FISCAL IMPACT:
|
Unknown.
|
|
|
B.
|
Amendment to the 2007-2008 State Legislative Session Program to include a proposal regarding a county corrections model for female offenders
|
|
|
RECOMMENDATION:
|
Recommend that the Board of Supervisors adopt a resolution amending the 2007-2008 State Legislative Session Program to include a proposal regarding a county corrections model for female offenders.
|
|
|
VISION ALIGNMENT:
|
Commitment: Ensure basic health and safety for all
|
Goal(s): 7—Maintain and enhance the public safety for all residents and visitors.
|
|
|
BACKGROUND:
|
As part of Shared Vision 2010, the County has undertaken several community conversations including the Women’s Criminal Justice Summit (Summit). Held on February 22, 2007, the Summit convened over 250 people representing a wide array of interests. Stakeholders included the Commission on the Status of Women, San Mateo County Bar Association, the Domestic Violence Council, District Attorney, Chief Probation Officer, the Sheriff’s Office, San Mateo County Courts, and the Women’s Recovery Association.
|
|
|
The recommended actions from the Summit include:
|
—
|
Support funding for community-based reentry and transitional services, including health care, housing, job training, substance abuse and mental health treatment with coordinated case management;
|
—
|
Enhance training to integrate gender-responsive strategies throughout the correctional system from initial assessment to treatment programs and the need for facilities with sufficient capacity;
|
—
|
Expand alternative sentencing options;
|
—
|
Coordinate policy, programs and services that support the children and families of incarcerated women, and;
|
—
|
Establish an inclusive community-stakeholder work group charged with developing strategic action plans, overseeing its implementation and reporting on outcomes for women’s criminal justice system reforms.
|
|
|
|
The proposal regarding a county corrections model for female offenders is intended to reflect many of the Summit’s recommended actions.
|
|
|
DISCUSSION:
|
This proposal would create a five-year pilot project enabling participating counties to develop a process to secure up to a total of 1,000 community correctional center beds for nonviolent women offenders, and/or 1,000 community-based beds for alternatives to incarceration and/or 1,000 reentry beds and programming for nonviolent female offenders. This proposal would require participating county corrections to undertake various tasks related to female offenders and to develop comprehensive strategic plans and programs for prevention, early intervention, incarceration, incarceration alternatives, reentry and after care for female offenders. Female offenders convicted of nonviolent offenses would be housed in local community facilities during their term of incarceration, and participate in aftercare programs during probation. This bill would also require participating pilot counties to establish or rehabilitate community correctional centers to house inmates and probationers in accordance with the above provisions, develop community-based alternatives to incarceration and/or reentry beds for nonviolent female offenders.
|
|
|
As planning for construction of a new women’s jail advances, this proposal would enable new and innovative opportunities for prevention, early intervention as well as alternatives to incarceration. The women’s jail has a state-rated capacity of 84 inmates, but often hold more than 150 women. The number of female inmates can grow large enough to require use of a wing of the men’s jail (Maguire Correctional Facility).
|
|
|
Growing research indicates that accommodating the needs of female offenders through gender-responsive strategies is critical to reducing recidivism. Strategies include increased counseling and drug abuse treatment, programs to transition inmates back into their communities and additional support in the areas of parenting training, health and decision making.
|
|
|
FISCAL IMPACT:
|
Unknown. Potentially positive. This proposal would target funds associated with AB 900 (Solorio), which was approved by the Legislature and signed by the Governor earlier this year.
|