HomeMy WebLinkAboutS01-Mayor's Office
CITy.oF SAN BERNARDINO - REQUEST FOR COUNCIL ACTION
From: Timothy J. Sabo, Sabo & Green
Subject: Veto Structure for JPA
Dept:
Date: January 27, 1996
ORIGINAL
Synopsis of Previous Council action:
llilml
Recommended motion:
Motion of the Mayor and Common Council to approve in concept the proposed restructuring of the IVDA and the
SBIAA with the inclusion of the veto power with the limitations as set forth in the attached outline.
--r;;;;; /i?A~
Signature
Tom Minor, Mayor
Contact person: Timothy J Sabo. Sabo & Green
Supporting data attached:
Phone: 1909\ 383-9373
Ward:
FUNDING REQUIREMENTS:
Amount:
Source: IAcc" No.\
IAcc.. Descriotion)
Finance:
Council Notes:
1
Agenda Item No. S/
;/27//1
AGENDA - REGULAR MEETING
January 27. 1997 - 9:00 A.M.
STAFF REPORT
Background:
At the regular meeting of the Inland Valley Development
Agency ("IVDA") held on January 8, 1997, the IVDA board discussed
and approved in concept a proposed restructuring of the IVDA board.
The restructuring of the IVDA board and the allocation of voting
interests would be in conjunction with combining the IVDA board
membership with that of the San Bernardino International Airport
Authority ("SBIAA"). Both the IVDA and the SBIAA would continue to
remain as separate legal entities and with a closer coordination of
staff functions to better serve both the redevelopment efforts of
the IVDA and the aviation activities of the SBIAA on the former
Norton Air Force Base.
The inclusion of the City of Highland in the membership
of the IVDA has previously been approved in concept by the IVDA,
the City of Highland and several of the municipal members of the
IVDA. Until the recent IVDA action on January 8, 1997, there was
no apparent consensus among the individual member entities as to a
modified voting structure that would modify the number of votes to
be assigned to each of the member entities. The City Council of
the City of Highland approved a restructured and combined IVDA and
SBIAA board on August 13, 1996, which provided for a total of six
(6) individuals to serve on the combined board with two (2) votes
being allocated for the City of San Bernardino and one (1) vote
each for the County and the Cities of Colton, Highland and Lorna
Linda. This form of the second amendment to the IVDA joint powers
agreement was not approved by all the current members of the IVDA.
Concerns were raised most recently as to the number of
votes that should be allocated to the City of San Bernardino in
exchange for each individual board member on the IVDA having the
right to veto certain actions of the IVDA. The veto power would
only exist as to activities proposed to be undertaken by the IVDA
outside the boundaries of the former Norton Air Force Base. A
compromise was reached whereby the City of San Bernardino would
receive three (3) votes and the County and the other cities would
receive one (1) vote each for a total board comprised of seven (7)
Pqel~2
individuals for both the IVDA and the SBlAA. However, the right to
exercise a veto power was the subject of discussion regarding the
limitations as to its use and the manner in which it could be
exercised by the individual board members of the IVDA.
The veto power may only be exercised by a board member
who was in attendance at the particular meeting with regard to
redevelopment activities proposed to be undertaken by the IVDA
outside the boundaries of the former NAFB and only if the action
has received not more than four (4) affirmative votes. Five (5) or
more affirmative votes on such a redevelopment activity action will
nullify any proposed exercise of the veto power. Any redevelopment
activity that has been approved in advance by the respective
legislative body in which territory the project is proposed to be
located will also nullify any attempted veto of the eventual IVDA
action on the matter.
The attached document outlines the other issues
associated with the combining of the IVDA and the SBlAA boards and
the manner in which the veto power may be exercised by an
individual board member of the IVDA. After such time as the Board
of Supervisors of the County and the City Councils of the Cities of
Colton, Highland, Loma Linda and San Bernardino have approved this
document in concept, the IVDA will distribute amendments to the
County and each city for their official action to so amend the
Joint Exercise of Powers Agreements establishing both the IVDA and
the SBlAA.
The IVDA requested that the City of Highland, as a
proposed member of the IVDA, and the City of San Bernardino and the
other current members of the IVDA consider this attached document
at the next available regular meeting dates and respond to the
IVDA as to the outcome of the actions taken.
Recommendation:
Motion of the Mayor and Common Council to approve in
concept the proposed restructuring of the IVDA and the SBlAA with
the inclusion of the veto power with the limitations as set forth
in the attached outline.
SBEO\OOOl\DOC\3200a
Page 2 of2
Issues to be addressed by the IVDA on January 8, 1997, with regard to the consideration of
the veto power of individual board members for actions of the IVDA relating to
redevelopment activities ofthe IVDA outside the boundaries ofNAFB
1. Seven (7) member boards for both the IVDA and SBIAA will be established with
identical individuals of each member jurisdiction serving on both boards so long as a
member jurisdiction elects to participate as a member on both boards. Both the IVDA
and the SBIAA will retain their independent legal status as separate joint powers
authorities pursuant to separate j oint powers agreements.
2. The City of San Bernardino will have three (3) individual members and three (3) votes;
one (1) individual member must be the Mayor of the City of San Bernardino and the
other two (2) must be council members of the City of San Bernardino; the County must
appoint only members of the Board of Supervisors, and the Cities of Colton, Highland
and Loma Linda must appoint a mayor or council member from their respective cities.
3. Each individual board member who serves as the primary representative from their
member jurisdiction will have an alternate board member appointed by their respective
legislative body; only individuals elected to the legislative body as a mayor, council
member or County Supervisor may serve on the IVDA and SBlAA boards as either a
primary or alternate board member.
4. Four (4) individual members must vote in the affmnative to approve any action of the
IVDA and the SBlAA unless a greater number of votes is otherwise required by law or by
the respective JP A agreement for either the IVDA or the SBlAA.
5. Quorum requirements will be met when four (4) individual members are present who
represent at least three (3) member jurisdictions.
6. A veto provision will be added to the IVDA JP A agreement to grant to each individual
member who has attended the meeting at which time the action of the IVDA was taken
the right to veto certain official actions of the IVDA under the following limitations:
a. Only redevelopment activities that provide some form of redevelopment
assistance (e.g., loan guaranty, tenant improvement loan or grant, interest
subsidies, rental assistance, payment of development fees which are not related to
infrastructure, etc.) to a private party for any development activity on a privately
owned parcel of property located exclusively outside the boundaries of the former
NAFB will be subject to the exercise of the veto power.
b. No action of the IVDA pursuant to paragraph a. above may be vetoed by an
individual member if the legislative body of the jurisdiction where the intended
project is located has consented to the providing of the intended assistance for a
redevelopment activity to be undertaken by the IVDA. Such legislative body
Page 1 of 3
must have consented to such action of the IVDA through official action by a
majority vote of the respective legislative body prior to the consideration of the
redevelopment assistance by the IVDA.
c. Any action of the IVDA which relates to redevelopment activities that has been
the subject of a noticed public hearing, whether or not required by state or federal
law, would not be subject to veto (e.g., land sales transactions, tenant leases,
ground leases, loans to industrial/manufacturing projects, etc.).
d. Any (i) infrastructure project or other public improvement or utility construction
or installation (whether or not undertaken by the IVDA, another public agency or
by a private developer), or (ii) financing whether through the issuance of bonds or
any conventional financing, or (iii) land acquisition transaction by purchase or
lease whether for a public improvement, infrastructure project, utility installation
or for redevelopment purposes, or (iv) housing activities whether for single or
multi-family development, would not be subject to the veto power.
e. Any redevelopment activity that otherwise would be subject to veto shall not be
vetoed if the redevelopment activity has been approved by at least five (5)
affirmative votes of the IVDA.
f. Any redevelopment activity that has been vetoed in the manner as provided below
may be brought back to the IVDA for consideration at any subsequent meeting of
the IVDA. Such subsequent consideration would once again permit the operation
of paragraph 6b if so utilized.
7. Any action that is the subject of a veto may be vetoed only by an individual member who
was present at the IVDA meeting and was considered as present for quorum purposes at
the meeting where the action occurred which the individual member seeks to veto. An
alterative member who was present at the meeting as an observer or as a member of the
general public could not independently exercise the veto power if the primary
representative from the particular member jurisdiction was in attendance at the meeting
and was considered as present for quorum purposes.
8. The intent to exercise the veto power by an individual member in attendance at the
particular IVDA meeting must be announced verbally prior to the adjourrunent of the
meeting by the individual member seeking to veto an action of the IVDA. Such intent to
veto must be announced at any time during the open and public portion of the meeting in
which the action occurred, and such verbal announcement shall be noted by the Secretary
of the IVDA in the official records of the particular meeting. The individual member
must thereafter submit to the Executive Director of the IVDA or the Secretary of the
IVDA a veto in written form signed by the individual member stating the item that is
thereby vetoed prior to 5:00 PM of the next business day following the meeting during
which the intent to veto was announced.
Page 2 of 3
9. A veto may only be exercised as to an entire action of the IVDA as contained in an
agenda item or as to a separate and distinguishable action if an agenda item contains more
than one (I) separate action in a series of separate actions. The veto power may not be
exercised as to individual portions of a single official action as taken by the IVDA.
CSBOI0006\DOCI507
01108\97 225 cJ
Page 3 of 3