Laserfiche WebLink
People do not notice when they are not paying for something, but they certainly would <br />notice it when they are trying to get to their jobs 10 years from now. This is an <br />investment in our communities, our residences and it is an investment that will keep <br />businesses vibrant and moving throughout Alameda County. He hoped Council would <br />support this plan and would encourage others to support it. <br /> <br /> Ms. Ayaia said that she appreciated the candor and forthrightness in coming <br />forward and saying that this plan is not going to solve the transportation problems and <br />that is where she had a problem with this belbm. She does not like to mislead the public <br />that this in itself is going to solve the problems but she thinks the CMA has done a good <br />job in trying to bring the entire Alameda County together as far as putting enough in each <br />of the funds to help get matching funds from other entities. She is hopeful that the CMA <br />will continue to work with the State. When people are willing to tax themselves, with <br />taxes such as the gasoline tax and a good portion of this tax goes to the Federal and State <br />governments and then they find out for years that this money has never been spent on <br />transportation, that is what got us here today. She is hopeful that the agencies that are <br />involved in transportation will help us to continue to push to see that the money that w-as <br />supposed to be used for transportation is, in fact, spent in those areas. <br /> <br /> Ms. Michelntti thanked Ms. Monsen for coming. She had a question regarding <br />creating another board and asked for more information about how- that will work and <br />what happens in 2015. <br /> <br /> Ms. Monsen responded by saying the reason why the CMA chose to create a new <br />board in this plan is because on the current Board, the Board of Supervisors have a <br />majority of the votes. It is a nine member board and they are five of the votes. With the <br />new plan there will be a ma~iority of ciW representatives. It will be an eleven member <br />board, five representatives appointed by the Mayor's Conference and the Mayor of <br />Oakland can appoint someone as well. This is a slight shill to a m~jurity of city <br />rcprcscutativc. They also wanted to make sure that if there are any problems with the <br />existing programs, they have all the money they need to deliver it. If thcrc were <br />something that created a problem in the existing program, they would not want that to <br />affect the future revenue stream. There is a firewall between the two programs so ACFA <br />will pay fur the ACTA projects that were promised and thc new board would fund the <br />expenditure plan. <br /> <br /> Ms. Michelotti asked what happens in 2015 when the present funding comes to an <br />end? <br /> <br /> Ms. Monsen replied that hopefully there ~vill be a dovetailing. Members of thc <br />two boards will be the same people. They have not made a decision about staffing and <br />there is no commitment that has been made to the existing ACTA stall2 If the future <br />board chooses to contract with ACTA for staffing, ACTA could do that. Two large <br />organizations are not envisioned. There is a staff of eight and they are prepared to <br />reduce staff if necessary. <br /> <br />Pleasanton City Council 8 06/20/00 <br />Minutes <br /> <br /> <br />