HomeMy WebLinkAbout1980-098
1 RESOLUTION NO. }(>O -9r<
2 RESOLUTION OF THE CITY OF SAN BERNARDINO AMENDING
RESOLUTION NO. 79-100 ENTITLED IN PART "RESOLUTION . . . GIVING
3 NOTICE OF INTENTION TO WITHDRAW . . . FROM JOINT POWERS AGREE-
MENT RELATING TO 'OMNITRANS' . . ."; PROVIDING THE DATE OF
4 WITHDRAWAL TO BE JULY ~T 1981; AND DIRECTING THE CITY CLERK TO
GIVE NOTICE TO AFFECTED PARTIES.
5
BE IT RESOLVED BY THE MAYOR AND COMMON COUNCIL OF THE CITY
6 OF SAN BERNARDINO AS FOLLOWS:
7
SECTION 1. Resolution No. 79-100 Section 1 Subsection C
8 is amended to read:
9
"C. The City of San Bernardino desires to withdraw from
10 the agreement as of July 1, 1981."
II
SECTION 2. Resolution No. 79-100 Section 2 is amended to
12 read:
13
"SECTION 2. Notice of Withdrawal.
14 Pursuant to Section 15 of the agreement, the City of San
15 Bernardtnd"hereby gives notice that it intends to withdraw, and
16 that it does withdraw, effective July 1, 1981, from the agreement
17 entitled "Joint Powers Agreement Between the County of San
18 Bernardino and the Cities of Chino, Colton, Fontana, Lorna Linda,
19 Montclair, Ontario, Redlands, Rialto, San Bernardino and Upland
20 Creating A County Wide Transportation Authority To Be Known As
21 'Omnitrans''', dated March 8, 1976, and from the joint powers
22 authority created by the agreement."
23
SECTION 3. The City Clerk is directed to transmit a
24 certified copy of this resolution to the Board of Directors of
25 "Omnitrans", the joint powers authority created by the agreement,
26 and to the governing body of each of the parties to the agreement.
27 I HEREBY CERTIFY that the foregoing resolution was duly
28 adopted by the Mayor and Common Council of the City of San
1
I do not approve Resolution No, 80-98 because the Council failed
to consider the following:
1) Urban Mass Transportation Administration (UMTA) policies
2
3
4 and regulations, recent state law (AB 1246, AB 402, SB 325), and
5 the assigned roles of SCAG and the San Bernardino County Transportation
6 Commission all are directed toward provision of area-wide, cost-
7 efficient transit systems, and specifically oppose a series of smaller,
8 fragmented operations,
9 The approval of separate operator status for San Bernardino
10 for receipt of SB 325 and UMTA funds will be very difficult to achieve,
11 and will probably not be successful,
12
2) The San Bernardino valley, and the entire east valley in
13 particular, is a common transportation unit, 0~1NITRANS has been
14 carefully built up to service the area, and the routes are inter-
15 twined between the various cities and the county, The transit needs
16 and realities cannot be serviced with a fragmented framework of
17 service,
18
19
The foregoing resolution is hereby disapproved this <i~ day of
---f'---4' - , 1980,
20
21
23
Bernardino
22
24
25
26
27
28