|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
COUNTY OF SAN MATEO
Inter-Departmental Correspondence
|
County Manager’s Office
|
|
DATE:
|
February 20, 2008
|
BOARD MEETING DATE:
|
February 26, 2008
|
SPECIAL NOTICE/HEARING:
|
None
|
VOTE REQUIRED:
|
Majority
|
|
TO:
|
Honorable Board of Supervisors
|
FROM:
|
John L. Maltbie, County Manager
|
SUBJECT:
|
County Manager’s Report #3
|
|
A.
|
Contract with Michael Y. Corbett and Associates for State Legislative Advocacy (Lobbying) Services
|
|
RECOMMENDATION:
|
Adopt a resolution authorizing:
|
|
|
1)
|
County Manager to execute an agreement with Michael Y. Corbett and Associates for state legislative advocacy services for the term of January 1, 2008 through December 31, 2008, in the amount of $93,000; and
|
|
|
2)
|
Deputy County Manager of Intergovernmental and Public Affairs to execute subsequent amendments and minor modifications, in an amount not to exceed $25,000
|
|
VISION ALIGNMENT:
|
Commitment: Responsive, effective and collaborative government.
|
Goal(s): 20—Government decisions are based on careful consideration of future impact, rather than temporary relief or immediate gain.
|
|
Performance Measure:
|
Measure for both Corbett and Associates and
Cline & Duplissea:
|
2007
Actual*
|
2008
Projected
|
Number of resolved legislative related issues addressed
|
13
|
25
|
Percent of resolved legislative issues resolved favorably
|
4
|
23
|
*This represents the outcome from the first year of a two-year session.
|
BACKGROUND:
|
Following a Request for Proposals (RFP) process in 2006, the Board of Supervisors authorized the County Manager to contract with Michael Y. Corbett and Associates (MYCA) and Cline and Duplissea for state legislative advocacy (lobbying) services for one year (2007) with an option for renewal (2008). This proposed action represents the 2008 renewal.
|
|
At the direction of the Legislative Committee, staff surveyed three neighboring counties contracts. Relative to other contracts, the County’s scope of work (Exhibit A) is fairly detailed and reasonably comprehensive. However, the scope of work for the County’s advocates did not include a requirement for an annual report. As a result, staff has proposed amendments to the advocates’ contracts to reflect these deficiencies.
|
|
DISCUSSION:
|
Michael Y. Corbett and Associates has served as the County’s primary legislative advocate after successfully securing the contract through a 1997 RFP process. Since then, MYCA has served as the County’s state legislative advocate through a series of contract extensions and renewals.
|
|
The total contract cost with MYCA will not exceed $93,000 and will be dispersed at $7,750 per month conditioned upon the County’s receipt of a monthly report detailing state legislation, budget issues and administrative/regulatory changes of concern to the County, actions taken to advance the County’s interests and expected future action.
|
|
After assessing performance under the current contract, staff has recommended various amendments in order to maximize performance. Staff believes that heightened contract administration and more meaningful application of current (and proposed) contract requirements can better meet the interests of the County. To that end, County staff has initiated dialogue with the advocates on how best to ensure that they most effectively comply with the various provisions of the contract and perform the specific range of services set forth in Exhibit A.
|
|
The Legislative Committee has asked that this contract be subject to a Request for Proposal (RFP) process for the 2009-2010 Legislative Session.
|
|
FISCAL IMPACT:
|
The total cost to the County will be $93,000 for the one-year contract.
|
|
B.
|
Contract with Cline & Duplissea for State Legislative Advocacy (Lobbying) Services
|
|
RECOMMENDATION:
|
Adopt a resolution authorizing:
|
|
|
1)
|
County Manager to execute an agreement with Cline & Duplissea for state legislative advocacy services for the term of January 1, 2008 through December 31, 2008, in the amount of $60,000; and
|
|
|
2)
|
Deputy County Manager of Intergovernmental and Public Affairs to execute subsequent amendments and minor modifications, in an amount not to exceed $25,000
|
|
DISCUSSION:
|
In 2005, Bill Duplissea of Cline & Duplissea worked as a state legislative advocate on behalf of the County to advance SB 203 (Simitian), which provides the County authority to seek a 1/8th cent sales tax increase for parks and recreation services. SB 203 was passed by the Legislature and signed into law. The Cline & Duplissea contract currently requires him to report to Michael Y. Corbett and Associates for reporting purposes. The Legislative Committee have asked that Mr. Duplissea issue written reports to the Committee directly.
|
|
The total contract cost with Cline & Duplissea will not exceed $60,000 and will be dispersed at $5,000 per month.
|
|
FISCAL IMPACT:
|
The total cost to the County will be $60,000 for the one-year contract.
|
|
C.
|
Resolution approving San Mateo County’s Federal Appropriations requests for Federal FY 2009
|
|
RECOMMENDATION:
|
Adopt a resolution approving San Mateo County’s Federal Appropriations requests for Federal FY 2009.
|
|
VISION ALIGNMENT:
|
Commitment: Responsive, effective and collaborative government
|
Goal(s): Goal 20—Government decisions are based on careful consideration of future impact, rather than temporary relief or immediate gain.
|
|
BACKGROUND:
|
Each year San Mateo County works with its Congressional delegation to secure federal funding (commonly referred to as earmarks) for specific projects. Last year, San Mateo County advanced five earmark requests: Preschool for All Funding, Emergency Department Workflow Redesign, Fitzgerald Marine Reserve Interpretive Center, Emancipated Foster Youth Housing, and the San Mateo County Children’s Receiving Home. Through the assistance of the County’s federal advocates, MARC Associates, the County was successful in securing funding for four of the five requests.
|
|
|
Project Name
|
Requested
|
Secured
|
—
|
Preschool for All Funding
|
$535,000
|
$312,000
|
—
|
Emergency Department Workflow Redesign
|
$755,000
|
$438,000
|
—
|
Fitzgerald Marine Reserve Interpretive Center
|
$750,000
|
$669,750
|
—
|
Emancipated Foster Youth Housing
|
$750,000
|
$150,000
|
—
|
San Mateo County Children’s Receiving Home
|
$2,000,000
|
0
|
|
With the November 2006 election and the heightened review process for federal appropriation requests, securing earmarks has become more challenging. In his State of the Nation address, the President reiterated his concerns regarding such requests. He vowed to veto spending bills that fail to reduce earmark spending by half of the FFY 2008 level. He has also issued an executive order directing federal agencies to ignore earmarks included only in committee reports (rather than in the text of the legislation itself).
|
|
DISCUSSION:
|
Despite the President’s position, our federal advocates believe we should continue to advance federal appropriations requests. To that end, staff recommends the following:
|
|
1.
|
Highway 92 Bicycle Overpass
|
Department: Parks and Recreation
|
Background: The Highway 92 Bicycle Overpass project would separate non-motorized trail users crossing Highway 92 near Skyline Boulevard. In San Mateo County, Highway 92 presents a considerable safety hazard to bicyclists, pedestrians and other non-motorized users traveling between Caņada Road and the Skyline Boulevard corridor north of Highway 92. Currently, they must travel for about 1,500 yards on the shoulders of Highway 92, which carries a heavy volume of fast-moving cars and trucks. Northbound travelers on 92 have to cross a high-speed merge lane where motorists driving northbound on I-280 exit to travel west on Highway 92. Congestion relief for automobiles traveling from Highway 280 to Highway 1 via Highway 92 will result and environmental protection to the adjacent San Francisco Public Utility Watersheds will also be preserved.
|
Potential Project Partners: CalTrans, the San Francisco Public Utilities Commission (SFPUC), the San Mateo County Transportation Authority. Advancement of this request will be conditioned upon securing partner support since Highway 92 is operated by CalTrans and the adjacent land is owned by the SFPUC.
|
|
2.
|
Sanchez Adobe Historic Site
|
Department: Parks and Recreation
|
Background: The completed Sanchez Adobe Historic Site project will balance the archaeological and preservation stewardship needs of the adobe structure and its surrounding landscape with the functional, programmatic, and interpretive needs of this public historical site. The project provides for enhanced visitor facilities at the 5.46-acre site including improved entry facility, rehabilitated adobe building, new interpretive center, renovated restroom facility, storage and relocated parking area.
|
Potential Partners: City of Pacifica, San Mateo County Historical Association, National Parks Service. Success for this request will be contingent upon securing support and clear alignment with the National Parks Service, which will likely be the most viable fund source for this project.
|
|
3.
|
Public Health Laboratory
|
Department: Health Department
|
Background: The Public Health Laboratory is the cornerstone of the disease surveillance and prevention effort for the County of San Mateo Health Department by providing life-critical services in an era when health threats can and do appear overnight. The highly qualified managers and microbiologists that work in the laboratory provide around-the-clock analysis of suspected food and water, biological, viral and mycological agents. The Public Health Laboratory provides services that safeguard entire communities. Unfortunately, the current facility suffers from several deficiencies that impair staff’s ability to meet the community’s public health surveillance needs. The most viable alternative is to build a new laboratory.
|
Potential Project partners: To be determined.
|
|
4.
|
San Mateo County Children’s Receiving Home
|
Department: Human Services Agency
|
Background: San Mateo County seeks funding to complete a new Children’s Receiving Home to replace the existing receiving home, which is 50 years old. The County has secured property at the new Youth Services Center, and partial funding for the new facility. The San Mateo County Receiving Home provides emergency shelter care for youth who are dependent children of the San Mateo County Juvenile Court due to issues of abuse and neglect. The program is co-ed and serves youth primarily between the ages of 12 and 18 years until a permanent home can be found.
|
Potential Project Partners: To be determined.
|
|
5.
|
Gender Responsive Programming
|
Department: County Manager’s Office
|
Background: Expand the County’s intensive programming services for women inmates beyond the current Choices Program, which is limited to 26 inmates, and offer a pilot, gender-responsive re-entry program for up to 40 sentenced inmates in a designated correctional facility.
|
Potential Project Partners: To be determined.
|
|
6.
|
Sewer Pipe Replacement
|
Department: Public Works
|
Background: With aging sewer systems and increasing costs associated with containing sewer problems, sewer pipe replacement would avoid costly sewer failures and unanticipated discharges of sewage into the County’s watersheds. There are a large amount of sewer pipes requiring replacement. This project is scalable to meet any federal funding provided. Staff anticipates that without federal funding many of the pipe replacement needs would be funded through one-time grants or amortized into sewer rates.
|
Potential Project Partners: To be determined.
|
|
7.
|
Solar Genesis
|
Department: Public Works
|
Background: Construct a one megawatt photovoltaic solar power electric generation facility. The facility would be constructed throughout the County Government Center, primarily on rooftops and above parking areas, serving dual purpose of electrical generation and shading. Solar energy is the only currently available renewable energy technology that can be utilized in San Mateo County. Utility based incentives are insufficient to make it possible to achieve a payback over the life of the equipment and the County is not eligible for federal tax credits. A large, aesthetically pleasing installation on the government campus of the County seat would generate significant interest in renewable energy throughout the County and stimulate investment in renewable energy technologies. This project would allow the County to take a leadership position in our local response to the impending climate change and would prime the pump in our efforts to achieve our objective 80% reduction in green house gas emission by 2050.
|
Potential Project Partners: To be determined.
|
|
FISCAL IMPACT:
|
Unknown. Potentially positive.
|
|
D.
|
All-Mail Ballot Pilot for the Special Congressional Primary on April 8
|
|
RECOMMENDATION:
|
None. Informational only.
|
|
VISION ALIGNMENT:
|
Commitment: Responsive, effective and collaborative government
|
Goal(s): 20—Government decisions are based on careful consideration of future impact, rather than temporary relief or immediate gain.
|
|
BACKGROUND:
|
As a result of Congressman Lantos’ death, the 12th Congressional District for California is now vacant. The Governor has called for a Special Election, for which the open primary will be held on April 8, 2008. The Special General Election, if needed, will coincide with the regular Statewide Primary on June 3, 2008.
|
|
The April 8 Special Primary will be an “open” primary, in which all candidates from all parties will be on the same ballot. If a candidate receives at least 50 percent plus one vote, that person will be considered the winner and will assume the remainder of Congressman Lantos’ term without a Special General Election. If no candidate receives at least 50 percent plus one vote of the April 8 Special Primary, there will be a Special General Election that will coincide with the June 3 Statewide Direct Primary. The Special General will include the names of each party’s candidate with the most primary votes by party. Candidates have(had) until February 25 to file for the Special Primary for the remainder of the 110th term.
|
|
DISCUSSION:
|
Chief Elections Officer Warren Slocum seeks legislative authority for a pilot to study the efficacy of an All-Mail ballot using the April 8 Special Primary for Congressman Lantos’ district. This pilot is intended to determine if an All-Mail ballot can increase voter turnout while producing cost savings.
|
|
In the 12th Congressional District, there are currently 255,749 registered voters. Of those, 101,448 (39.7 percent) are currently registered as permanent Vote by Mail voters. The 12th Congressional District has 383 reporting precincts. Of those, 37 (9.7 percent) have been designated as Vote by Mail precincts.
|
|
The Chief Elections Officer believes that an all-mail ballot process might increase participation and reduce costs. Current mail ballot voters have a participation rate between 70 to 85 percent. This is in stark contrast to in-person voter rates of 40 to 50 percent. Oregon’s experience has shown a five percent increase from traditional voting methods to an All-Mail ballot process.
|
|
Similarly, two recent Vote by Mail Elections held in San Mateo County and Santa Clara County offer evidence that turnout increased by about 5 percent overall. Latino and Asian voter turnout increased by 4.5 percent and 50 percent respectively. The Redwood City Elementary School District held an election in May 2005 and the Santa Clara Library District held a special election earlier in that same year—both elections sought voter support for funding and had relatively low voter turnout.
|
|
Those who vote by mail can go online and determine when their voted ballot was received by the Elections Office through a program called Track and Confirm that was created by San Mateo County and will go into effect in March 2008 on a statewide basis. This process provides all voters with a measure of confidence by letting them know that their ballot was received in time to be counted as well as the opportunity to do something about it if it was not received for any reason.
|
|
The April 8 Special Election could be conducted with at least two Universal Voting Centers where anyone could vote or drop off a voted ballot. Those centers would be outfitted with accessible voting devices that comply with the Help America Vote Act.
|
|
Supporters could include the Central Labor Council, the League of Women Voters and the Letter Carriers Union of California. Opposition could come from the Election Integrity Committee of the San Mateo County Democratic Central Committee. Republican Party has had consistent opposition that stems from concern over the potential for an increase in voter fraud. However, the Elections Office notes that there are more internal controls on voting by mail than voting at the precinct. Voters who vote at the polls on Election Day sign the roster and are not required to produce any form of identification. Their signatures are not compared to the voter registration affidavit on file. Voting by mail actually increases the level of security and reduces the potential for fraud because signatures are compared prior to counting the vote.
|
|
San Mateo County and the City and County of San Francisco must begin printing ballots by March 1, 2008. As a result, authority for an all-mail ballot must be secured by March 1, 2008.
|
|
Action on this issue conforms with the state legislative priority to protect County revenues and operations found in the 2007-2008 Legislative Program, which was approved by the Board on February 5, 2008.
|
|
FISCAL IMPACT:
|
The April 8 Special Congressional Primary is expected to cost an estimated $1,000,000. Under the proposed All-Mail ballot pilot, the Primary would cost an estimated $650,000.
|