HomeMy WebLinkAboutResolution 6227 N.C.S 02/26/1973 • //3
•
r
•
411
Resolution No. 6227 N.C. S.
ORIGINAL
RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF PETALUMA AUTHORIZING
THE FILING OF A CLAIM TO THE METROPOLITAN TRANSPORTATION
COMMISSION IN ACCORDANCE WITH THE REQUIREMENTS OF THE
TRANSPORTATION DEVELOPMENT ACT OF 1971.
K:":")
INTRODUCED BY COUNCILMAN
11/1")14:1P-1,1-14W At An
Adjourned Meeting of the City Council of the City
of Petaluma on the 2bth day of February 1973.
WHEREAS, the Transportation Development Act of 1971 provides
for allocation of funds to cities, counties , and transit districts
for the purpose of providing public transportation services, highways,
and facilities for the exclusive use of pedestrians and bicycles ; and
WHEREAS, the Metropolitan Transportation Commission has been
designated as the regional transportation planning agency for the
region comprising the City and County of San Francisco, Counties
of Alameda, Contra Costav Marin, Napa, San Mateo, Santa Clara,
Solano, and Sonoma; and
WHEREAS, the Metropolitan Transportation Commission has adopted
rules and regulations relative to the administration of the
Transportation Development Act of 1971 , Chapter 1400 , Statutes
1971 , and amended by Chapter 1408 , Statutes 1972; and
'
WHEREAS, Rule 3 requires applicants to file claims for
allocation of local transportation fund monies at least 120 days
prior to the beginning of the fiscal year; and
WHEREAS, Rule 7.C. 1 . provides that a resolution be adopted
by applicant' s legislative body after a public hearing contain-
ing the finding that applicant at this time has no further financial
needs for ublic transportation assistance under Article 4 of the
p p
Transportation Development Act; and
;.Z (0 )- al 7
f
410 411
•.
WHEREAS, the two public agencies which provide public
transportation services within Sonoma County, the Golden Gate
Bridge Highway and Transportation District and the City of
Santa Rosa, plan to file claims under Article 4 of the Trans-
portation Development Act of 1971;
NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED that this City Council
of Petaluma concurs and supports these claims under Article 4
of the Transportation Development Act of 1971; and
BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED that this City Council does and
hereby declar e s that City hat the Cit of Petaluma does not at this
time need financial assistance under Article 4 of the Trans-
portation Development Act since it does not own, operate, or
maintain a public transportation system; and
BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED that this City Council does and
it hereby requests that monies available for allocation pursuant
to Section 99233 (e) of the Public Utilities Code be allocated
in accordance with "Guidelines for Allocation of Article 8
Funds in Sonoma County" attached hereto as "Exhibit A" ; and
BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED that this City Council does and
it hereby submits a claim for a portion of any funds which
may be available to cities and counties under Article 8 of the
Transportation Development Act of 1971 , not to exceed the
allocation determined in accordance with the "Guidelines for
Allocation of Article 8 Funds in Sonoma County" together
with any assignment of allocation made pursuant to said
Guidelines ; and
-2-
•
•
i
‘ BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED that the Mayor of Petaluma be
and she is hereby directed to prepare and forward a
Transportation Claim for said funds along with a copy of
"Guidelines for Allocation of Article 8 Funds in Sonoma
County" , and certified copies of this resolution to the
Metropolitan Transportation Commission prior to March 1 , 1973.
_3_
under the power and auth yA -. er ed u.en' this Co cil by the Charter of said City.
COUNCILMEN VOTE
Seconded by I
- Ayes Noes Absent
I hereby certify that the foregoing resolution was duly and Councilman Robert A. Brunner
regularly introduced and adopted by the Council of the City of " John W. Cavanagh, Jr.
Petaluma, on the 2 6th day of Februar 19 7 3 , by Richard W. Clecak
the following vote
4.6 Robert E. Daly
(SEAL) .. &;)--1/C. 1 �'�-�-�' -- _...
Mayor of the City of Petaluma " . Fred V. Mattei V
William A. Perry, Jr.
Attest ..i._'_... -- ---- ..
City Clerk Mayor Helen Putnam
,
U
n 411 411
Y
ORIGINAL
GUIDELINES FOR ALLOCATION
EXHIBIT
OF ARTICLE 8 FUNDS IN SONOMA COUNTY
A. GENERAL
It is agreed that :the local transportation fund is to be
allocated in accordance with the priorities set forth in
Section 99233 of the Public Utilities Code
B. ARTICLE 8 CLAIMS
It is respectfully requested that the moneys to be allocated
under Section 99233(e) of the Public Utilities Code be allocated
only to eligible applicants, as defined in Section B(4) below,
and in accordance with the following subsections (1) , (2) and
(3) :
(1) With respect to the cities of Sonoma, Sebastopol
Healdsburg, and Cloverdale - The allocation to eligible
applicants shall be such that the sum of Article 4 and
Article 8 funds allocated to an applicant (hereinafter
referred to as maximum entitlement) shall be equal to
that proportion of all funds available for all Article
4 and Article 8 claims that the population of the eligible
applicant bears to the population of the entire County,
with the exception that an eligible applicant may assign,
subject to the provisions of Section 99231 of the Public
Utilities Code , all or a portion of its allocation to
any other eligible applicant. In the event that there
are insufficient funds to cover the allocations as
above computed, the deficit will be eliminated by a
proportionate reduction in the maximum entitlements
computed above for each eligible applicant.
(2). With respect to the County of Sonoma and Cities of
Santa Rosa Petaluma Rohnert Park and Cotati - If
any moneys remain after the allocations provided for
-1-
r
•
R
• ,* -. • .
a
411
in Section B (1) above, they shall be allocated to the
remaining eligible applicants in such a manner that the
sum of Article 4 and Article 8 funds allocated to an
applicant (hereinafter referred to as maximum entitle-
ment) be that proportion of the sum of Article 4 and
Article 8 moneys available to those eligible applicants
considered in this Section B (2) that the population of
the eligible applicant bears to the sum of the populations
of those eligible applicants considered in this Section B
(2) , with the exception that an eligible applicant may
assign all or a portion of its allocation as above-determined
to any other applicant, subject to the provisions of Section
99231 of the Public Utilities Code.
(3) Remaining funds - If an eligible applicant does not claim
and/or assign its entire allocation, the remainder will
be used to increase proportionately the maximum entitlement
of the other applicants defined in Section B (2) above.
(4) Eligible applicant - An eligible applicant is defined as
a County or City applicant which has not filed a claim
for Article 4 funds which claim by itself exceeds the
applicant' s maximum entitlement.
-2-