HomeMy WebLinkAboutAgenda Report - May 6, 1981 (54)SUPPORT FOR
CITY OF LONG
BEACH
RESOLUTION
City Clerk Reimche presented a letter which had
been received from Dr. Thomas J. Clark, Councilman,
City of Long Beach, stating that the City of
Long Beach requests Council's review and support
of City of Long Beach Resolution No. C-23159 -
"A Resolution of the City Council of the City
of Long Beach Expressing its Support of Efforts
by the Federal Administration to Return Powers
to Local Entities and Urging a Cart,ful Imple-
mentation of Those Efforts in Ways that will
Enhance, Not Further Impede, Home Rule". With
the tacit concurrence of the Council, the
City Clerk was directed to write a letter of
support regarding the resolution to the City
of Long Beach.
iy
4`t
✓
r 1
OFFICE OF THE CITY COUNCIL
CIVIC CENTER PLAZA
333 WEST OCEAN BOULEVARD
LONG BEACH. CALIFORNIA 90802
April 14, 1981
Dear Mayor and Council.nembers:
DR. THOMAS J. CLARK
COUNCILMAN, ►OURTM DISTRICT
213/590-6139
We are all keenly aware of the current efforts to address the nation's
economic problems. As a part of these efforts, locs1 governments have
a major opportunity before them to lend their suggestions for a restruc-
turing a -f the federal -state -local relationship.
Consequently, the City of Long Beach requests your review and support of
the attached resolution. The City's resolution speaks to local govern-
ment's support of the return of local powers which have been eroded over
the years by the growth of federal programs: In particular, we support
the Administration's efforts to clarify and redefine the roles and respon-
sibilities of federal, state and local governments. We do so, however,
with the concern that federal funds be directly applied to that unit of
government responsible for a program's administration. Local governments
cannot afford to see the siphoning off of pass-through funds by the
state, nor the development of a state bureaucratic ;Haze.
We sincerely urge you to adopt such a resolution as enclosed, and forward
your concerns to our national leaders. The City of Long Beach appreciates
your joining us in an effort to positively restructure our government to
meet the needs of our citizens.
nc erel y,
DR. THOMAS J. C RK ,
Councilman, C t of Long Beach
Chairman, Leg tion Committee
TJC :1 aw
Enclosure
APR
4
IN
of
° w w cc
G w Y w -G G E ... . N °•
5.w
`►e�r,J Y G x' O .. C O G O ... w c " O' Z► M
' •, •ir :' Ww " •°' Y �A w " G'ao
0. m v 'tis' Y Q w�VO 1.
fi-
c ; Q EJPq
l4 in ,Cw E Q
OwVO
o\) rn ji: .EQ. O
�b
VY1
.• -Y
o • �! r�{A`l,i` v¢i�C":��V`0c-0 a., .DD�.o'��-�F' �G .�.yrnYr_vA ... O
epo
•vC
i
�o>Mf >> S 6
X o0w1. r�� E3
E C op
> C > 44 C O 0 e0AO
.� r
O Cs
G
oi
0 �E�0,Ln o C. 1. » a
C1%0 wYE7'�E
s+ _G cYaC °rN J oo E4VU
4010 0V r Nf O ic ,
~ z ~CO O GO E EV'Gw r .2
CL V 'O
'- =- -- —
- —
"
-� -_ ---
---- •— _ =
Nation's Cities Weekly Much 3% 1981
Development from p. 1
Grant program .also could apply for
rChecklist:
mediate effect will be for small cities
grants from this "state pot."
The Office Management
Community Development Grants:
that have multi --year commitments
of and.
from HUD. States might be asked to' '
Budget has no plans toset a limit on theR�c�C�cin's
Proposals for Change
take over administration of all present,
amount of administrative cost the
small -cities programs, or these com-
states could charge to the program.
(S millions)
mitments might be included in the
OMB also has indicated that arca offi-
state block grant. OMB has said that it
ccs of the Depart mcnt of housing and
1981 1982 1983
-- - -
will review the current experiments in
Urban Development would be reduced
Large cities and urban counties
2,653 2.791 2,791
state administration of block grant! a
in staff to handle only a limited number
States
— 875 1,375
Kentucky and Wisconsin.
of housing and community develop-
Small chics
938 — —
The Urban Development Action
t programs still controlled at the
UDAG-type subprogram
— Soo —
Grant would be eliminated and re-
nsuonal level.
The administration also plans to
Secretary's discretionary fund
104 _. _
-- --• •
placed with $500 million for a"UDAG-
create a state blockrant to replace the
G p
Total--ftlock grants
3,69S 4,166 4,166
type sub -program" in fiscal 1982; the
would be eliminated in 1983.
present CDB(; small cities program,
Separate UDAG program
h p g
675 — —
.program
The administration also has pro -
but in 1982, rather than 1983. (Sec The
Weekly, March 16.1
Total,
4,370 4,166 . 4,166
posed toeliminate the HUDsecretarys
The block grant would use the cur•
discretionary program in I982. That
rent state formula to distribute ear-
are replaced by the combined block
man in recent testimony before the
program has been used to support
technical assistance, disaster programs,
marked funds for the block grant.
Officials said OMB will revie•" this
grant.for states.
The administration's latest thinking
Senate Budget Committee. OMB aides
elaborated on the pro, osals last week
innovative grants and aid to Indian
tribes.
formula over the next year to see if it
should be changed in 1983, when the
on community development programs
wis revelled by Office of Management
at a meeting of the Council for State
Community Affairs Agcacies.
The administration pians to send
proposed legislation to Congress in the
action grant and small -cities programs
and Budget Director David A. Stock-
Officials coWdn't say what the im•
next several weeks. 0
4
IN
of
° w w cc
G w Y w -G G E ... . N °•
5.w
`►e�r,J Y G x' O .. C O G O ... w c " O' Z► M
' •, •ir :' Ww " •°' Y �A w " G'ao
0. m v 'tis' Y Q w�VO 1.
fi-
c ; Q EJPq
l4 in ,Cw E Q
OwVO
o\) rn ji: .EQ. O
�b
VY1
.• -Y
o • �! r�{A`l,i` v¢i�C":��V`0c-0 a., .DD�.o'��-�F' �G .�.yrnYr_vA ... O
epo
•vC
i
�o>Mf >> S 6
X o0w1. r�� E3
E C op
> C > 44 C O 0 e0AO
.� r
O Cs
G
oi
0 �E�0,Ln o C. 1. » a
C1%0 wYE7'�E
s+ _G cYaC °rN J oo E4VU
4010 0V r Nf O ic ,
~ z ~CO O GO E EV'Gw r .2
CL V 'O
_
a
1
RESOLUTION NO. C-23159
9
3
A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF
4
THE CITY OF LONG BEACH EXPRESSING ITS
5
SUPPORT OF EFFORTS BY THE FEDERAL
6
ADMINISTRATION TO RETURN POWERS TO LOCAL
ENTITIES AND URGING A CAREFUL IMPLEMENTATION
S
OF THOSE EFFORTS IN WAYS THAT WILL ENHANCE,
9
NOT FURTHER IMPEDE, HOME RULE.
10
�c"d
tt
WHEREAS, the current administration has pledged itself
co s
12
to reducing the costs of the federal government while, at the
13
same time, -returning to local entities many of the powers that
U
� $
14
have gradually been assumed in Washington over a period of many
15
ears as a art of extensive federal funding activities; and
Y P 9
16
WHEREAS, cities throughout the nation and most certainly
1'
the City of Long Beach have, in many past instances, utilized
18
federal funds well and efficiently to implement policies and pro -
19
grams of vital concern and assistance to the people of tnose
20
cities; and
21
WHEREAS, these federal funds have been best utilized
77
and most helpful when they were unconstrained by conditions and
23
regulations unrelated to the objectives and realities of the
74
local community utilizing the funds; and
25
WHEREAS, the current federal administration has
26
indicated that a part c: its fiscal and regulatory reform effort
27
will be to deemphasize so-called categorical (constrained) aid
28
programs while, at the same time, enhancing block grant (uncon-
1
trative bottlenecks and counter productive regulatory constraints
thAh -exist today. Thus, federal funds for city programs should
pass directly to cities and should not be funnelled or passed
through the state.
Sec. 4. That as federal policies are adopted and
implemented to stimulate healthy economic growth and improve pro_
ductivity, reduce inflation through tax and spending reductions,
restrain the growth of federal spending and reduce the burden on
the public and private sector, the City should once again emerge
as that unit of general purpose government closest to the people
and most capable of defining and implementing goals and objec-
tives that truly reflect the concerns and beliefs of those people
in a way that can restore a popular confidence in the ability of
government to be. responsive to the people who support it.
Sec. 5. That the City Clerk is hereby directed to
forward copies of this resolution to President Ronald Reagan,
Vice President George Bush, United States Senators Alan Cranston
and S. I. Hayakawa, and Congressmen Glenn Anderson and Dan
Lundgren, Robert Carlson of the White House Staff and such other
persons as may be appropriate.
I certify that the foregoing resolution was adopted by
the City Council of the City of Long Beach at its meeting of
z;rjI n , 1981, by the following vote:
Ayes: Counc ilmembers :Wilder, Hall, Clark, Kell, Wilson, Tuttle,
Rubley, Sato.
Noes: Councilmembers: F13erton-
3
1
2
3
4
5
6
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15 415
16
11
18
19
20
21
221
2311
24
'S
26
2;
28
0
strained) programs;
WHEREAS, the Board of Directors of the National League
of Cities has adopted a policy statement regarding President
Reagan's economic recovery program and, as a part of that state-
ment, has indicated its strong support for fundamental reform
and relief from the burdens of federal regulatory activities and
a modification of those 6ctivities to eliminate unnecessary regu-
lations affecting local governments and a development of a com-
prehensive federal policy on mandated costs on local governments;
NOW, THEREFORE, the City Counci1 of the City of Long
Beach resolves as follows:
Section 1. That the City Council lauds the expressed
goal of the administration to return to local governments many
of the powers that have gradually been eroded away over the past
decade as a part of extensive federal funding activities.
Sec. 2. That, in implementing these expressed goals,
the City Council urges the administration and Congress to exer-
cise diligence in assuring that the legitimate and acceptable
relationships between the federal, state and local governments
be observed. 2n this regard, the City urges a rejection of any
system that would require the passing or funnelling of federal
funds for essentially local purposes through state government.
Sec. 3. That while it may be perfectly appropriate
for certain funds to be paid directly to the state (e.g.,
those relating to state supported health or welfare or educa-
tional activities), state administration of federal funds for
city programs might, in the end, result in even worse aaminis-
2
13
f
1
2
3
4
S
6
WHK:11
3/31/81
20
0
Absent: Councilmembers : None.
4
0
SHELBA PCHUL
C ty Clerk
CITY COUNCIL
ROBERT G MURPHY, Mayor Pro Terns CITY OF LO D I
RICHARD E HUGHES
CITY HALL. 221 WEST PINE STREET
WAITER KATNICH POST OFFICE BOX )20
LAMES w F'iNKERTON, Ir LODI. CALIFORNIA 95241
(209) 334-5634
May 13, 1981
Dr. Thomas J. Clark
Councilman, City of Long Beach
Civic Center Plaza
333 West Ocean Boulevard
Long, Beach, CA 90802
Dear Councilman Clark:
HENRY A. GtAVES. Jr.
City I►tanager
ALICE M RE IMCHE
City CEerk
RONALD M SUN
City Attorney
Your April 14, 1981 letter and attached Resolution
No. C-23159 was presented to the Lodi City Council
at its May 6, 1981 meeting.
The City Council wishes also to voice its support of
efforts by the Federal Administration to return
powers to local entities and also urges a careful
implementation of those efforts in ways that will
enhance, not further impede, home rule. We would
ask that the City of Lodi be added to the list of
!: municipalities supporting this position.
By Direction of the Lodi
City Council
111
47
Alice M. Reimche
City Clerk
AR: dg