Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAboutAGENDA REPORT 1991 0306 CC REG ITEM 11A Vi his(b) MOORPARK ITEM be A PAUL W. LAWRASON JR. Oa 4�, STEVEN KUENY )ORPARK, CALIFORNIA o° ms`s City Manager Mayor City Cou It Meeting i i CHERYL J. KANE BERNARDO M. PEREZ Mayor Pro Tern of {� X994 City Attorney 9t— SCOTT MONTGOMERY /, - •��t PATRICK RICHARDS,A.I.C.P. Councilmember ACTION: (,/A�/, //f f/ o-j�� , Director of JOHN E. WOZNIAK J_! O.oq//--, Community Development Councilmember `° jOy JOHN F. KNIPE LILLIAN KELLERMAN B A���iudia.... City Engineer City Clerk JOHN V. GILLESPIE Chief of Police RICHARD T. HARE City Treasurer MEMORANDUM TO: The Honorable City Council FROM: Susan Cauldwel�sistant to the City Manager DATE: February 27, 19991/ SUBJECT: SCAG Draft Proposal on Regional Governance Background The subject of regional government has surfaced again in Sacramento. The concern at the state level is that regional issues are not being adequately addressed at the local level and that existing regional agencies lack the power to address regional issues. Assembly Speaker Willie Brown has introduced AB3 as a successor to last year's failed AB4242. In brief, the bill divides the state into seven regions, each with a 13 member directly elected governing board. Ventura County is included in a region that mirrors the SCAG region. Each region would assume responsibilities of existing Councils of Governments, Regional Transportation Planning Agencies, Air Pollution Control Districts, and Regional Water Quality Control Boards. The regional bodies would be responsible for the development of regional plans which would contain the following elements: air quality, water quality, transportation, housing, capital facilities, and open space utilization. Last year, the City Council acted to oppose AB4242 primarily because of concerns about Ventura County's representation on the regional board. SCAG Proposal In response to AB3 and other regional government proposals, SCAG has developed its own regional governance proposal for the Southern California region (provided under separate cover) . 799 Moorpark Avenue Moorpark, California 93021 (805) 529-6864 The Honorable City Council February 27, 1991 Page 2 SCAG proposes, during a 30 month period, to integrate existing plans (e.g. , air quality; hazardous waste; water supply, quality, and treatment; solid waste transportation; regional transportation; transportation improvement; and growth management) into a 20-year regional plan and to develop a regional governance proposal to be approved by the state legislature. A framework of regional goals, standards, schedules, and growth projections, developed with input from cities; counties; and existing single-purpose regional agencies, would guide the development of the integrated regional plan. Designated subregions and existing single-purpose agencies would develop plans based on existing legal authority and submit the plans to SCAG. SCAG would review the plans for conformity with the region's adopted goals, policies, standards, and for consistency among plans. A three step conflict resolution procedure is also proposed. SCAG also proposes to change its name to the Southern California Assembly for Governance (SCAG) . The Executive Committee of SCAG would be vested with legislative and governing powers for the agency. Membership on the Executive Committee would include one representative and alternate from each member county, except Los Angeles County, which would have two representatives and alternates; one representative and alternate from the cities within each county; three representatives and three alternates from the City of Los Angeles; one representative and alternate from each city of 250,000 population or greater; and three at-large representatives and alternates. In June 1994, SCAG proposes to submit the Southern California regional governance plan to the state legislature. The plan would identify the boundaries; structure; method of governance; powers and responsibilities; process for interregional interactions; funding sources; and planning process for the region and subregions. According to SCAG, the regional organization would not have direct operating, implementing, or regulation-issuing powers. The development of the plan would acknowledge local governments' primary responsibility for plan implementation. In addition, SCAG states that local governments would be required to conform to the adopted regional plan at the plan or program level, but not at the project level. From staff's perspective, it is difficult to predict how these principles, which form the basis of SCAGs proposal , would overcome various existing obstacles to solving regional problems. A funding source for the regional plan has not been selected, although possible sources have been identified (e.g. , TDA, vehicle transfer tax, direct tax, etc. ) . It can be assumed that existing agencies with established funding sources (e.g. , APCD, VCTC) would be reluctant to relinquish their revenue. This issue, along with the required membership in SCAG provision is of concern. The Honorable City Council February 27, 1991 Page 3 Currently, SCAG membership is voluntary and Moorpark is not a member of SCAG. City/County Forum In 1990, after the introduction of AB4242, elected officials from each city in Ventura County and two county supervisors began meeting every few months to discuss ways to protect the interests of the cities and county in any regional government proposal . The consensus of the forum is that cities and the county have a good record of addressing and resolving countywide issues (e.g. , solid waste, transportation) . The chief concern about regional government proposals centers on the loss of local control if Ventura County is included in a region that also includes Los Angeles County. The City/County Forum is still exploring various options available to Ventura County including forming a region with Santa Barbara and San Luis Obispo Counties, obtaining a single county/region designation (which San Diego County has achieved) , or remaining in the SCAG region. The group has heard presentations from Todd Kaufman, Assembly Office of Research, who drafted AB4242 and Supervisor John Flynn, who presented the SCAG proposal. SCAG Presentation Mayor John Melton, Santa Paula and Al Fuentes, SCAG staff, will be present at the City Council meeting to present the SCAG proposal and answer questions. Various SCAG committees have authorized the release of the SCAG proposal for local government input, but have not taken an official position on the proposal. The SCAG Executive Committee will again discuss the proposal at its March 7, 1991 meeting. The proposal will also be the featured topic of SCAGs General Assembly to be held on March 14 , 1991 in Santa Monica. State Activity Governor Pete Wilson is also interested in exploring new ways to address regional problems and can be expected to offer his suggestions in the future. At this time, however, it appears the state's fiscal problems will receive primary attention in Sacramento and that regionalism may not be fully debated this year. Staff Recommendations 1. In light of continuing discussions between Ventura County cities and the county, staff recommends that no action be taken on SCAGs regional governance proposal at this time. 2. Staff also recommends that the City Council direct staff to monitor regional government proposals and advise the City Council when action may be required. evp, '/ - . RESOLUTION A RESOLUTION OF THE SCAG BYLAWS AND RESOLUTIONS COMMITTEE SUPPORTING A SET OF BASIC PRINCIPLES FOR REGIONAL POLICY REFORM February 7, 1991 WHEREAS, cities and counties are substantially exluded from the "policy table" of many single-purpose regional agencies: and WHEREAS, there is no provision for policy development for regional issues involving two or more counties -- except "voluntary cooperation" or to leave the issue in the hands of Sacramento legislators; and WHEREAS, cities, counties, joint powers agencies and special-purpose districts must have common arenas for design of plans and policies affecting the interaction and resolution of differences between them; and WHEREAS, SCAG can provide the framework to ensure that regional policy reform is a "bottom-up", multi- issue-multi-purpose process for local government input and participation; NOW, THEREFORE BE IT RESOLVED that SCAG supports the following basic principles for achieving regional policy reform in southern California: BASIC PRINCIPLES a. Regional policy reform should riot create another layer of government which usurps the power of local elected officials. b. The regional planning process is an interactive process between cities, subregions (cities and counties) the regional agency, and the state. c. A subregion may be comprised of cities, a single county, or portions of more than one county; existing subregional organizations may be designated; new subregions may be formed with majority concurrence by the affected county boards of supervisors and with majority concurrence by the affected cities. d. The regional/subregional governing boards shall be composed only of local elected officials selected by their peers. e. Regional policy-making must be comprehensive including necessary trade offs to achieve multiple goals. f. Local government actions should be consistent with adopted regional and subregional plans at the plan or program level. g. In the event of disagreement regarding plan conformity and consistency, a conflict resolution process shall be developed to resolve conflicts between and among component agencies. h. The regional organization shall have no direct operating, implementation or regulation-issuing powers, rather those authorities should continue to rest with local governments. i. A guaranteed funding source(s) for the regional and subregional bodies must be identified, but which will not compete with local governments; an appropriate fund allocation formula will be applied to support regional/subregional planning processes. DRAFT PROPOSAL FOR REGIONAL GOVERNANCE Prepared by Subcommittee on Regional Governance October 25, 1990 Presented for Consideration by the SCAG Executive Committee November 1, 1990 Amended by Subcommittee on Regional Governance November 14, 1990 Proposed Revisions by John Kiriin, Consultant to Subcommittee on Regional Governance December 16, 1990 1 -r Draft SCAG Regional Governance Proposal December 6, 1990 Summary 1. Basis for Proposal • Regional issues are not being solved under present institutional arrangements and policies • Local governments are generally excluded or have limited roles under present re- gional governance structures • SCAG should have a proactive response to regional reform legislative proposals being actively pursued in Sacramento (AB 3 W. Brown, AB 76 Farr, etc.) 2. Basic Principles • Regional reform should not create another layer of government which usurps the power of local elected officials • Regional Governance, Not Regional Government Regional Government means a single regional government which: makes policy in all areas, issues regulations, delivers services, taxes broadly Regional Governance means a comprehensive regional planning body which: makes policy in limited areas of regional impact, manages a regional planning process, does not issue regulations, does not deliver services, does not tax broadly • Local government should be maintained in the "driver's sear of any vehicle for regional reform • SCAG can provide the framework required to ensure that regional reform is a "bottom-up" process for local government input and participation. • Regional policy making must be comprehensive and with necessary trade offs to achieve multiple goals • Local government actions must conform to an adopted regional plan at the plan or program level, but=at the project level. • The regional organization should not have direct operating, implementation or regula- tion-issuing powers which remain with existing local governments • The regional planning process is an interactive process between subregions (local governments) and the regional agency • The regional/subregional governing boards should be composed only of elected officials selected by their peers • • A guaranteed funding source(s) for the regional and subregional bodies must be identified, but which will not compete with local governments; • An appropriate fund allocation formula will be applied to support regional and subregional planning processes 3. Basic Approach • A phased process is proposed to give local elected officials sufficient time to create new regional/subregional structures for southern California • Phase 1 has a 30-month time frame and has two basic sets of activities: • integrating existing plans into a 20-year regional plan • developing a regional governance proposal to the state legislature • The existing regional planning organization, SCAG, is the framework for the Phase 1 activities • SCAG is given statutory status for the Phase 1 period to ensure local government participation 4. Phase 1 Structure • SCAG given authority as a statutory agency to conduct Phase 1 activities for a 30-month period • SCAG keeps current name or changes name to "Southern California Asssembly for Governance" • SCAG keeps its current boundaries • SCAG governing board remains the same or changes in accord with SB 969 • SCAG and subregions are provided adequate funding to support Phase 1 activities 5. Phase 1 Activities Regional Plan Development and Integration • SCAG, subregions, cities, counties, single-purpose agencies, others develop an inte- grated 20-year regional plan through a jointly developed framework of goals, stan- dards, policies, schedules, and growth projections • Existing agencies develop plans under existing authorities and submit them to SCAG for conformity review and adoption • The regional plan will include: Environmental Management • Air Quality • Hazardous and Integrated Waste • Water supply and Water Quality • Waste Water Treatment • Solid Waste Management Transportation • Regional Transportation Plan • Transportation Improvement Plan • Growth Management, including Regional Housing Needs Assessment • In the event of disagreement regarding conformity and consistency, a conflict resolu- tion process is used which gives the cognizant governing board (subregion or region) the authority to resolve the issue • SCAG has ultimate authority for development of 20-year integrated regional plan Regional Governance Proposal • SCAG will develop a Regional Governance Proposal to be submitted to the state Legislature • The SCAG framework will ensure that the proposal is developed through a"bottom- up" process • The proposal will identify the following components: • region's boundaries; subregions' boundaries • regional and subregional agencies structure and method of governance • powers and responsibilities of the regional and subregional agencies • selection, terms and powers of the regional and subregional governing boards • process for inter-regional interactions with adjoining regions • sources of funding for regional and subregional agencies, the planning process, and for infrastructure projects of regional significance • regional plan development and integration authorities and responsibilities, includ- ing a workable conflict resolution process 6. Upon approval of the proposed agency by the legislature and governor, all existing SCAG duties, obligations, and privileges shall be transferred to the proposed agency. 10/25/90 amended 11/14/90 proposed revisions 12/16/90-Kirlin DRAFT PROPOSAL FOR REGIONAL GOVERNANCE • CHAPTER 1. FINDINGS AND DECLARATIONS Article 1. Findings 1. Findings: (a) Explosive population growth in California has placed an increasing strain on existing public facilities, services, and resources. Traffic congestion, inadequate waste disposal and sewage capacity, deteriorating air and water quality, and a lack of affordable housing are some of the problems caused by unmanaged growth in urban and urbanizing areas of the state. (b) Improving regional governance is a pressing need in Southern California. Critical problems exceed the capacity of present institutions and policies for adequate response. (c) Managing the economic and population growth of one of the most dynamic, diverse, growing regions of the world.is imperative. Growth issues cross not only political boundaries but function lines of responsibility as well. Because decisions meant to solve one growth policy problem often create problems in other policy areas, effective growth management must comprehensively integrate competing and conflicting policy objectives. Therefore,because agencies in California operating on a regional scale are primarily single purpose, they are incapable of making the complex tradeoffs inherent in decisions about growth. 2 (d) In addition to the problem of single-purpose responsibility, regional agencies do not have the authority to require effective implementation of plans or to require consistency among local general plans and regional goals,and are dependent on local government members for fiscal and political support. (e) The lack of integrated state policies regarding growth and environmental management hinders the ability to develop effective regional plans. (f) Local governments are increasingly excluded from effective participation in regional governance, having limited inputs into the processes by which regional plans in such critical areas as airqualitiy or transportation are developed,being subject to conflicting demands in current regional plans, and lacking adequate financing to complete activities projected in existing regional plans. (g) Development of a mechanism for cooperative local government action on regional issues will achieve: economies of scale in infrastructure development; interjurisdic- tional cost equity where problems extend beyond legal jurisdictional boundaries; improved decision making on siting locally necessary developments of regional benefit; integrated and consistent planning, and more equitable tradeoffs in policy decisions where problems extend beyond the functional responsibilities of single-purpose regional agencies. (h) Regions vary and the reforms needed to improve regional govemance in southern California may differ from those needed in other regions of the state. (i) The specific reforms in structures and policies needed for southern California can best be developed in that region, being guided by state policies as delineated in the declarations below. • 3 Article 2. Declarations 2. Declarations (a) Reorganization of the regional institutions responsible for managing growth and improving environmental quality and improved policies are necessary to cope with the population increases projected for the state through the end of the century and to sustain a desirable quality of life for all Californians. (b) The following goals shall guide regional institutional reorganizations and policy changes: i) Regional policy making should address growth in population and economic activity while simultaneously meeting applicable national and state standards for environmental quality. ii) Regional policy making must be comprehensive, occurring in policy frameworks and institutional arenas that ensure the trade offs necessary for achieving multiple goals. iii) Cities, counties and existing single purpose agencies must participate in develop- ment of the goals, standards, schedules and growth projections of any effective comprehensive regional plan, either through subregional structures or working directly with the regional structure. iv) The policies and actions of cities, counties and special districts in a region must conform to the adopted regional plan, but the regional institutions should not have direct operating or regulation-issuing powers; those powers remain with existing local governments. Local government and subregional conformance with the adopted regional plan must be determined at a level of plan or program consistency. Regional and state agencies have no project level review authority. Project level land use decision making authority is reserved for cities and counties only. 4 v) Equitable access to jobs, housing,politics, and basic governmental services must be assured to all residents of California. vi) Opportunities for development of regional political leadership and of regional citizenship are important to long-term regional governance. vii) The goal of joining information, effect and choice shall guide reforms wherever possible;many issues are best resolved at a local or subregional level,within the guidance provided by the adopted regional plan. viii) Successful regional planning will require broad participation in plan development and use of conflict resolution processes in ensuring conformity of action to the plan. Conflict resolution processes must be present at all levels: local- subregional;subregional-regional;and regional-state. ix) Adequate authority, responsibilities and financial resources are needed to ensure the success of the new regional governance structures. (c) The Southern California Assembly for Governance is created as described in Chapter 3 and empowered to develop proposals for institutional and policy reforms for the southern California region, subject to the following guidelines: (i) The proposed plan of reforms shall be developed through broadly participative processes, ensuring participation by all existing local govemments and agencies and making provision for participation by citizens, businesses and groups. (ii) All local governments and agencies in southern California shall provide whatever information and assistance is needed for the reform activities. (iii) During the 30 month plan integration phase,the Southern California Assembly for Governance shall integrate plans developed under existing authorities into a comprehensive regional plan. It shall have no new planning authority. 5 CHAPTER 2. DEFINITIONS 1. The definitions contained in this chapter govern the construction of this Act unless the context requires otherwise. [Note this is not a complete list.] 2. "Subregion" means a grouping of cities or a county or portions of more than one county organized, pursuant to Chapter 5, Article 3 of this Act, and for comprehensive problem solving purposes within a geographic common area of interest. 3. "Region" means an area defined in Chapter 3, Paragraph 1. 4. "Single purpose agency" as used in this Act, means air quality management districts, hazardous and solid waste authorities, water quality control boards, transportation commis- sions and authorities. 5. "Long range plan" means the 20-year integrated plan developed by the Southern California Assembly for Governance. The Plan may be redefined at 3-year intervals. 6. "Environmental management" as used in this Act, means air quality, hazardous and integrated waste, water supply and water quality, waste water treatment and solid waste management. 7. "Plan Integration Phase" means the period from January 1, 1992 to June 30, 1994 when the integrated 20-year long range plan is developed and approved. 6 CHAPTER 3. CREATION OF THE SOUTHERN CALIFORNIA ASSEMBLY FOR GOVERNANCE 1. A Southern California Assembly for Governance(SCAG)is hereby established for the region composed of the cities and counties of Ventura, Los Angeles, Orange, San Bernardino, Riverside and Imperial. 2. The effective date of this legislation is January 1, 1992. The Southern California Assembly for Governance shall remain the regional comprehensive planning agency for southern California until and unless superseded by an act of the Legislature pursuant to Chapter 7 of this Act. CHAPTER 4. THE EXECUTIVE COMMITTEE (See Attachment 1. for Optional Executive Committee Structure) 1. The legislative and governing powers of the Agency shall be vested in the Executive Committee. 2. The Executive Committee shall be constituted as follows: (a) Membership. The membership of the Executive Committee shall be one representa- tive and one alternate from each member county, except the County of Los Angeles which shall have two representatives and two alternates, one representative and one alternate from the collective member cities within each county, three representatives and three alternates from the City of Los Angeles,one representative and one alternate from each city of 250,000 population or greater exclusive of the City of Los Angeles,and three at-large representatives and their alternates. (1) The official representative and alternate for each county shall serve as a member and alternate, respectively, on the Executive Committee. (2) An official representative from one of the member cities in each of the counties 7 enumerated in Chapter 3 above,shall be appointed by a plurality vote of the official representatives of the member cities of such county present at the Spring meting of the General Assembly to represent the member cities in said county unless the provisions of Subsection (c) hereof are followed. An alternate for each shall be selected in the same manner. (3) In those counties enumerated Chapter 3 above where the cities have joined together through a Joint Powers Agreement with the county to form a county-wide Association of Governments within the county, such association may formally notify the Southern California Assembly for Governance of their intention to call together the official delegates and alternates from the member cities of the Southern California Assembly for Governance within the county for the purpose of selecting the official representative and alternate to the Southern California Assembly for Governance Executive Committee. (4) In addition to the city representative selected by the member cities within Los Angeles County, the official representatives of the City of Los Angeles shall be members of the Executive Committee. (5) The Executive Committee shall elect three representatives-at-large and three alternates-at-large from among the councils of city members, who shall serve for one-year terms. Delegates and alternates shall not be from the same city. After one year, the three alternates-at-large shall automatically become the three representatives-at-large and the Executive Committee shall elect three new alternates-at-large from among the councils of city members, who shall serve for one-year terms. (6) Only the official representative shall have the right to vote as the member of the Executive Committee, except that an alternate may vote in the absence of the official representative. 3. Each Executive Committee member shall serve for the term of existence of the Southern 8 • California Assembly of Governance and may be reappointed by the appointing authority. 4. Beginning at first meeting and every year thereafter the Executive Committee shall elect from its members a chairperson,vice chairperson and may elect other officers it deems necessary from among its members. CHAPTER 5. POWERS AND DUTIES Article 1. General Powers and Duties 1. Notwithstanding any other provision of law,and except as provided in this Chapter,all existing state and federal statutes and regulations which delegate duties, obligations or privileges to the Southern California Association of Governments shall be transferred in full force and effect to the Southern California Assembly for Governance unless in conflict with the provisions of this Chapter. 2. The powers and duties provided herein shall remain in full force and effect until such time as Southern California Assembly for Governance proposes and the legislature enacts supersed- ing legislation. 3. During the first 30-months after enactment,the Southern California Assembly for Governance shall be responsible for developing, integrating and approving the following regional plans: (a) Environmental management, including air quality, hazardous and integrated waste, water supply, water quality, waste water treatment, and solid waste management; (b) Transportation; including the regional transportation plan and the Transportation Improvement Plan; and (c) Growth Management, including the Regional Housing Needs Assessment. 4. The Southern Califomia Assembly for Governance should be responsible for ensuring Plan implementation and for resolution of conflicts. 9 Article 2. Subregions 1. Subregions may be created under this act for the purposes of participation in the comprehensive regional planning process and conflict resolution. Subregional organizations in existence on or before January 1, 1992 may be designated as the subregional organization for purposes of this Act. 2. A subregion may be comprised of cities, a single county, or portions of more than one county. 3. A subregion may only be formed with the concurrence of a majority of the board of supervisors and a majority of the cities representing a majority of the population within the incorporated area of that portion of each county included within the subregion. 4. The membership of the governing board of a subregion formed pursuant to this Act shall be determined with the concurrence of a majority of the board of supervisors of each county within the subregion and a majority of the cities having a majority of the population in the incorporated area of that portion of each county within the subregion. Each voting member of the subregional organization shall be an elected official of a local governmental entity within or partly within the subregion. Article 3. Plan Development and Integration 1. Effective January 1, 1992,the existing regional plans for transportation, air quality, hazardous and integrated waste, water quality, growth management, and housing needs shall be inte- grated and shall form the basis for a new 20-year Plan for the region. 10 (a) In collaboration with subregions, cities, counties, single purpose regional agencies and others, the Southern California Assembly of Governance shall initiate development of the integrated regional plan by providing a framework of regional goals,standards,schedules and growth projections. (b) Designated subregions and existing single purpose agencies shall develop plans based on existing legal authority, unless otherwise specified in this act, and submit to the Southern California Assembly for Governance by January 1, 1993. (c) Upon receipt of these plans, the Southern California Assembly for Governance shall transmit relevant portions to designated subregions and jointly review them for conformity with its adopted goals, policies, schedule and standards, and for consistency among plans. In this review, it shall negotiate with subregions, single purpose agen- cies and local governments to ensure conformity and consistency. (d) In the event that a single purpose agency does not develop the plan for which it is responsible by January 1, 1993, the Southern California Assembly for Governance shall have the authority and responsibility to initiate and complete such a plan, transferring funds from the delinquent agency for that planning purpose. 2. Existing subregional and local organizations, public and private, shall be encouraged to participate in development of plans for their region. 11 3. In the event of conflict between a local government and subregion, or between a single-purpose agency or subregion and the region, a three step conflict resolution process shall be used: First step: Negotiation by the affected parties (maximum time, 1 month) Second step: "Fact-finding" and mediation by three mutually selected individuals (maximum time, 2 months) Third step: Cognizant governing board (subregion or region) resolves issue 4. The Southern California Assembly for Governance shall approve the integrated 20-year Regional Plan by January 1, 1994, and has the ultimate responsibility and authority for development of the integrated 20-year Plan. CHAPTER 6. FUNDING 1. Given the level of activity and responsibility to be identified In an approved work program, a funding base would be developed to support the regional/subregional interactive planning process, with funding emphasis to subregions. The following funding sources are being examined as options for this funding base: (a) Existing funds available to the Southern California Association of Governments. (b) Lifting the cap on Transportation Development Act (TDA) funding. (c) A specified percentage of monies under AB 2766. (d) A vehicle transfer tax. (e) State appropriation. (f) Assessment of fifty(50)cents per resident for each city and unincorporated areas of the counties. 12 (g) A property transfer assesment . (h) A twenty-five(25) cents parking fee at major events generating 10,000 or more cars. 2. Any funds generated beyond those required for plan integration shall be apportioned as incentives to local governments for plan implementation. CHAPTER 7. REGIONAL GOVERNANCE PLAN 1. By June 30, 1994, the Southern California Assembly for Governance shall submit to the legislature a proposal for regional governance for southern California. The proposal shall identify: the boundaries of the region and subregions; the structure and method of governance for the regional and subregional agencies;the powers and responsibilities of the regional and subregional agencies; the selection, terms and powers of the regional and subregional governing boards; the processes for inter-regional interactions with adjoining regions;and the sources of funding for the agency,the planning process, and for infrastruc- ture projects of regional significance. The authorities and responsibilities may be greater or less than those provided for in the Plan Integration Phase. (a) The functional planning areas shall not be limited to those described in Chapter 5, Article 1, of this Act. (b) In developing its proposal for plan development and implementation,the proposal shall be governed by the following criteria: (1) the regional plan and process shall be comprehensive, integrating the functional areas, local, subregional, regional and statewide goals; (2) the plan and plan development process should promote consistency among local, subregional, regional and statewide plans; 13 (3) the primary responsibility for implementation of the plans should remain the responsibility of local government; (4) participation of local government in the regional planning process is central to the process and must be encouraged and promoted through the use of subregional councils; (5) a workable conflict resolution process that includes all levels: local- subregion; subregion-region; and region-state must be developed. 2. Notwithstanding any other provision in the proposal, all existing state and federal statutes which delegate duties, obligations, or privileges to the Southern California Assembly for Governance shall be transferred to the proposed agency, in full force and effect, unless in conflict with the provisions of the proposal. 3. The proposed agency shall begin operation 180 days after legislation is signed by the Governor. 14 ATTACHMENT I. CHAPTER 4. THE EXECUTIVE COMMITTEE 1. The legislative and governing powers of the agency shall be vested in the Executive Committee. 2. The Executive Committee shall be constituted as follows: (a) One representative appointed by each of the county board of supervisors in Orange, Riverside, San Bernardino, Imperial and Ventura Counties and two representatives appointed by the Los Angeles County Board of Supervisors. (b) One representative appointed by each city selection committee of Orange, Riverside, San Bernardino, Imperial, and Ventura Counties and three repre- sentatives appointed by the President of the city council of the City of Los Angeles. Additionally, for every one million county residents after the first million residents, the city selection committee for such county, or if there is established a countywide regional association, the county regional association for such county, shall select one additional representative for each one million county residents. In the county of Los Angeles the population of the City of Los Angeles shall be subtracted from the population of the county for the purposes of calculating additional city representatives. (c) All members of the Executive Committee shall be elected officials. (d) Alternative representatives shall be permitted, if they are appointed in the same manner and represent the same entity or group of entities as the representative for whom each serves as an alternate. 3. Each Executive Committee member shall serve a term of two (2) years and may be reappointed by the appointing authority. 4. Beginning at first meeting and every year thereafter the Executive Committee shall elect from its members a chairperson, vice chairperson and may elect other officers it deems necessary from among its members. 15