County votes to take po­si­tions on state propo­si­tions

Imperial Valley Press - - FRONT PAGE - BY ED­WIN DEL­GADO Staff Writer

EL CEN­TRO — The Im­pe­rial County Board of Su­per­vi­sors voted on Tues­day to ap­prove res­o­lu­tions to sup­port Propo­si­tions 68 and 69, which will ap­pear on the June 5 bal­lot. The board also ap­proved a res­o­lu­tion op­pos­ing the pro­posed re­peal of the gas tax, which is ex­pected to ap­pear on the Novem­ber bal­lot.

Propo­si­tion 68 is the $4.1 bil­lion park bond de­signed to ad­dress nu­mer­ous needs re­lated to parks, open spa­ces, wa­ter and cli­mate change-re­lated is­sues fac­ing Cal­i­for­nia.

The rea­son the propo­si­tion mat­ters lo­cally is be­cause this bond in­cludes $190 mil­lion for the Sal­ton Sea man­age­ment pro­gram and $10 mil­lion for the New River.

Should the bond pass along with the pro­posed wa­ter bond in Novem­ber, they would com­bine for a to­tal of $400 mil­lion for the Sal­ton Sea. That will fund habi­tat and dust sup­pres­sion projects to cover nearly 30,000 of ex­posed playa over the next decade.

The park bond also in­clude different pro­grams that lo­cal cities and the county could po­ten­tially tap into in order to up­grade their out­door recre­ation in­fra­struc­ture, in­clud­ing $18 mil­lion that will be avail­able for fair­ground im­prove­ments and $30 mil­lion for county and re­gional park im­prove­ments to be dis­bursed across the state.

Also as part of the con­sent agenda the board unan­i­mously voted to en­dorse the wa­ter bond for the Novem­ber bal­lot.

The board also sup­ports Propo­si­tion 69, which will cre­ate a con­sti­tu­tional amend­ment which will for­bid the state Leg­is­la­ture from us­ing gas tax funds for any other pur­pose that is not trans­porta­tion re­lated. In ad­di­tion, the board voted to op­pose any po­ten­tial bal­lot mea­sure to re­peal the gas tax, as the new fund­ing mech­a­nism is al­low­ing the Depart­ment of Pub­lic Works to take on a larger num­ber road and bridge re­pair projects as a re­sult of the ad­di­tional fund­ing.

Dur­ing Tues­day’s meet­ing, the Board of Su­per­vi­sors also heard a pre­sen­ta­tion from Pub­lic Ad­min­is­tra­tor and Area Agency on Ag­ing Di­rec­tor Rosie Blanken­ship re­gard­ing the agency’s fund­ing from the state for the next fis­cal year.

The agency will re­ceive $7,500 more over­all than in the pre­vi­ous year from the Cal­i­for­nia Depart­ment of Ag­ing, Blanken­ship re­ported. How­ever, while some pro­grams gained money, oth­ers have lost. For in­stance, the home-de­liv­ered meals pro­gram gained $36,000 in fund­ing, but the se­nior nu­tri­tion con­gre­gate meals pro­gram lost $38,000.

Blanken­ship de­scribed the lat­ter sit­u­a­tion as “dis­heart­en­ing.”

Un­der the pro­gram, the agency pro­vides se­niors with meals in a cen­tral­ized lo­ca­tion, but the cuts will elim­i­nate a month’s worth of meals. Blanken­ship told the board her staff was in the process of ap­ply­ing to the county’s Com­mu­nity Ben­e­fit Pro­gram to seek ad­di­tional fund­ing to cover that need.

Newspapers in English

Newspapers from USA

© PressReader. All rights reserved.