Metro - File #: 2017-0226

• File #: 2017-0226
• Type: Motion / Motion Response
• Status: Agenda Ready
• File created: 3/24/2017
• In control: Board of Directors - Regular Board Meeting
• On agenda: 5/25/2017
• Title: RECEIVE AND FILE the status report on Measure M Local Return allocation alternatives.
• Sponsors: Finance, Budget and Audit Committee
• Indexes: Eric Garcetti, Formula Allocation / Local Return, Janice Hahn, Local Returns, Measure M, Measure R, Motion / Motion Response, Policy Advisory Council, Proposition A, Proposition C, Robert Garcia, Senate Bill 1, Zoning

Date	Action By	Action	Result
5/25/2017	Board of Directors - Regular Board Meeting

Meeting_Body
REGULAR BOARD MEETING
MAY 25, 2017

Subject/Action
SUBJECT: RESPONSE TO MOTION - DRAFT MEASURE M LOCAL RETURN GUIDELINES

ACTION: RECEIVE AND FILE

Heading
RECOMMENDATION

Title
RECEIVE AND FILE the status report on Measure M Local Return allocation alternatives.

Issue
ISSUE

At the March 2017 Board meeting, Motion to Item #8, Directors Garcia, Hahn, and Garcetti was adopted to direct the CEO to:

A. Evaluate additional Local Return allocations to assist small cities
1. Setting a floor
2. Daytime and nighttime population
3. Employment population
4. Proportion of Measure M sales tax generated

B. Identify other eligible funding sources that can supplement the Measure M Local Return subfund

C. Evaluate the reliability and validity of data sources considered

D. Report back on the Local Return distribution for public review in May, and

E. Incorporate feedback from the Measure M Policy Advisory Council.

The full text of the motion is included in Attachment A.

Discussion
DISCUSSION

Below is in response to the Motion.


A. Evaluate additional Local Return allocations

Local Return funds from Proposition A, Proposition C, and Measure R are allocated on the basis of residential population, using annual estimates from the State Department of Finance. Similarly, the Measure M Ordinance states that Local Return funds are to be returned to the cities within Los Angeles and Los Angeles County "based on population." However, population is not defined in the Measure M Ordinance.

County Counsel has determined that a population-related allocation is required to comply with the terms of the Measure M Ordinance, ruling out alternative measures such as lane miles. However, variables that more accurately reflect the wear and tear on jurisdictions' local infrastructure caused by surges in daytime population or through traffic may be considered if the association/correlation to population, as required by Ordinance, can be substantiated. Alternati...