Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAboutMINUTES - 07221986 - RC nft To:,. BOARD OF SUPERVISORS tf' 11 FRdResources Committee M: ColJl ll July 7, 1986 Costa DATE: C`"''.. "J SUBJECT: OAKLEY FIRE PROTECTION DISTRICT FIVE-YEAR FINANCING PLAN SPECIFIC REQUEST S) OR RECOMMENDATION(S) & BACMROUPD AM JUSTIFICATION Recommendation: Approve the Oakley Fire Protection District five-year financing plan as prepared by Robert M. Nyman, Consultant, and amended after discussion with the Chief and Commission of the Oakley Fire Protection District. Financial Impact: The plan recommends adoption by the Board of Supervisors of a new fire protection facilities fee on new construction throughout the district. It is estimated that such fee would raise about $1,195,000 over a five-year period. The fee would average about $480 per new dwelling unit. The report also recommends the commencement of a process to raise an amount of $68,000 annually from a new district-wide fire suppression benefit assessment. The assessment would amount .to. about $22 per residential dwelling unit per year. The revenue from such assessment would be used to finance the addition of one unspecified fire fighter position. Background: Our Committee met with Consultant, Robert M. 'Nyman and representatives from the County Administrator and the Oakley Fire Protection District to review the proposed five-year financing plan for the district. The plan sets forth recommended additions/improvements for the fire district over the next five year period and a recommended plan for financing those improvements. CONTINUED ON ATTACHMENT: YES SIGNATURE' RECOIIIIENDAT I ON OF COUNTY ADN I N 1 STRATOR RECOINIEIOAT I ON OF BOARD iQ<OmMm I TTEE _ APPROVE OTNQRC����� SIGNATURE S : Supervisor Tdm Torlakson Supervis Nancy Fanden ACTION OF BOARD ON July 22, 1986 AFPROY® AS RlxOmmMENORM X CrrHER WiE OF SUPOW I SORS 1 NOW33V MIT`IFT TI#T THIS IS A TRUE X UNANIMMIS (ABSENT ) AILD C laq=31 CWT OF AN ACTION TAIMIDI ATM' NOES: MD ENTERED M THE N11NI TES OF 1W WWJD ABSFM: ABSTAIN: OF SWERVISORS CN THE vATE SMM. cc,County Administrator ATTESrE� -�9 Oakley Fire Protection District R H L BA aa�a OF THE ear of Auditor-Controller SUFMMSOWS MD COUNTY *MNI STMTOR M382/7-83 or � � ^DEPUTY SSI W.El DORADO DR. TELEPHONE: Robert M. Nyman P.O.Box 10 (9161666-4558 y -0WOODLAND.CA 95695 April 7, 1986 County Administrator County of Contra Costa Administration Building Martinez , CA Subject: Recommendations For Financing Fire District Five Year Plan -- OAKLEY Pursuant to a. contract between the County and myself, presented in the attached, and summarized below, is the recommended plan for fi- nancing the improvements indicated for the Oakley Fire District. As you are aware , the district, when originally requested to submit a Five Year Plan, asked for an additional period of time in which to develop its plan. That task was undertaken simultaneously with the development of the financing plan recommendations . As a result, the attached represents the district's Five Year Plan, -as well as the financing plan. RECOMMENDED ACTION It is recommended that the County of Contra. Costa implement the pro- posed financing plan by taking the following specific actions : 1 . Resources Committee recommends to the full Board of Supervisors the adoption, by the County, of a new Fire Protection Facilities (developer, or new construction Fee on new construction throughout the district, to raise $ 1 , 195, 000 over a five year period. (Estimated impact: approximate $ 480 fee per average new dwelling unit. ) ; and 2. Resources Committee recommends to the full Board of Supervisors the commencement of a - rocess to raise an amount of $ 68, 000 annuall ($340, 000 over a five year period from a new district-wide Fire Suppression Benefit Assessment, to finance the addition of one fire InsDecto.r position, - as authorized by Sections 50078 et serf. of the Government Code . (Estimated impact: approximate $ 22 cost per average existing residential unit per yeas. ) See footnote below. RECOMMENDED FINANCING PLAN The plan for identifying the district needs and for financing them Footnote: The additional position discussed in this plan is an unspecified fire professional rather than a Fire Inspector. -two- Oakley Five Year Financing Plan (con' t. ) is summarized below (It is detailed in the attachment. ) : 1 . Plan Development. The consultant met with the district' s top chief officers and members of the commission. Data used in the planning process was obtained from the district, local resources and the county government. It was determined that the fire fighting capabilities of the district will be heavily taxed in meeting the impact of new developments now underway or planned. A new fire station in the developing area and enlarge- ment of the Oakly station will be necessary to serve the expected growth. The hiring of an Inspector position will also be necessary. 2. Methods of Financing Selected. The passage of Proposition 13 has left very few alternatives available for financing of fire service improvements. From -the available alternatives , the following two methods appear appropriate for use by the Oakley Fire District: Method of Total Amount Financing Financing Over 5 Years Covers a . Fire Protection non-recurring Facilities (developer, costs of new or new construction) or enlarged Fee $ 1 , 195,000 facilities b. Fire Suppression annual recur- Benefit Assessment 34.0,000 # ring cost ($ 58, 000) of one Inspector position, in- cluding fringe ben. grand total , 1 , 535, 000 non-recurring; and recurring; * $ 68 , 000 per year assessment would continue ( indefinitely) after end of five year period The basis for recommending the two financing methods is discussed below: -three- Oakley Five Year Financing Plan (con' t. ) a. Fire Protection Facilities (developer, or new construction) Fee. As indicated above , an amount of $ 1 , 195, 000 is proposed to be financed from a new district-wide Fire Pro- tection Facilities Fee. This would be a charge placed on all new construction within the district at the time of issuance of building permits. The fee is based on a widely-used concept that new construction creates an im- pact upon the fire service , and the fee is intended to be a. cost of mitigating that impact. (Elsewhere in the state , where city governments typically finance and operate fire departments , use of the fee for fire suppression facilities is common. ) Implementation of the fee would be by ordinances adopted by the Board of Supervisors . One ordinance , covering all of the unincorporated area of the county, authorizes the imposition of such fees. The other ordinance contains the fees relating just to the Oakley district. The $ 1 , 195, 000 proposed to be realized over a five year period from fees upon new construction is needed to finance a new fire station, including site , apparatus and furnishings and equipment, and to enlarge the existing Oakley station. When the $ 1 , 195, 000 is divided by the estimated number of residential units anticipated to be constructed over the next five years ( 2, 500T,— it results in an average fee per unit of 80. Comparable fees would be developed into a schedule covering other types of new construction (commercial , industrial, etc . ) . An amendment to the county' s General Plan to permit the use of the new construction fee to mitigate fire service impacts from such construction will be needed. The Board of Supervisors has initiated the process to so amend the General Plan. b. Fire Suppression Benefit Assessment. The State Legislature has enacted Government Code sections permitting the use of such assessments . The legal authority commences with Section 50078 of that code. The process for using the assessments consists of the drafting of an ordinance following a model issued by the State Fire Marshal . The ordinance contains a uniform schedule of rates based upon the type or use of property and the risk classification of the improvements on the property'. The assessments must relate to -the benefits to four - Oakley Five Year Financing Plan (con't. ) be received by the property so assessed. The assessments apply to most parcels within the district, however agri- cultural lands are treated differently from others , under the legal basis for the assessments . A written report is filed -containing a description of each lot or parcel subject to the assessment, the amount of the assessment for each parcel for the fiscal year, and the basis and schedule of the assessments. The Clerk receiving the filing causes a copy of the notice of filing of the report and the time, date and place of a hearing on the assessments to be mailed to each parcel owner, at least two weeks prior to a scheduled hearing. Upon the completion of the hearing of objections or protests, the Board of Supervisors may adopt the assess- ments if it finds the valid protests to be less than 50 of the total amount of expected revenue. If the amount of valid protests is more than 5%, the assessment must be submitted to the district voters for approval by a majority of those voting on the proposition. (The assessment must be abandoned if the protest is 50% or more . ) The adopted assessments are collected along with the annual property tax amounts for each, parcel. The legislation authorizing the assessments has a January 1 , 1988 "sunset" provision. Legislation to extend that date is now under consideration in the State Senate . As indicated in the earlier listin of methods of financing recommended , a total of $34.0, 000 (968, 000 per year) , to cover the hiring of an Inspector position, is proposed to be realized from a Fire Suppression Benefit Assessment during -the five year period starting with 1986-87. Based on an estimated 3, 100 existing dwelling units in the Oakley Fire District , the average annual amount of the assessment would be approximately 22 per residential unit. The assessment would need to continue indefinetly to finance the Inspector position after '.the end of the five ,year period . five - Oakley Five Year Financing Plan (con' t. ) 3. Other Alternatives . In earlier reports on the subject of fire service financing for Contra Costa County fire districts , lists of potential methods of funding have been included. A number of these really only related to some form of borrowing, such as using a lease-purchase method for gaining the - funds to construct a new fire station. The problem with such methods is that they don' t raise any new revenue for paying the annual costs ( interest and redemption) of borrowing. The methods recommended in this report all raise new revenue , which is precisely what is needed, if the improvements listed in the attached plan are to be realized. One alternative that is available is a "special tax" submitted to the voters of the district for approval by a. two-thirds vote of those voting on the measure (Govern- ment Code Sec. 50075 et seq. ) . This , of course, could be used to finance facilities and services under the Mello-Roos Community Facilities Act (Government Code Sec. 53313 (b) ) . However, there is no advantage to the use of a "special tax" alternative , if the methods recom- mended in this report receive adequate support from the community. This report was made possible by the assistance of the fire chief and commissioners , as well as employees of the County of Contra Costa . I wish to extend my personal thanks for their assistance and professional work. Robert M. ifiyman, Consultant r a Dist:r. int:: fCounty of OAKLEY [RECOMMENDED FINANCING PLAN Contra Costa FIRE. DISTRICT ADDITIONS AND IMPROVEMENTS Type of Addition or Amount to be Recommended Method Improvement Financed of Financing 1 . New Fire Station (near Live Oak Rd. & Oakley Rd. ) : a. acquire site $ 65, 000 b. design and con- struct station 600,000 entire item (project) to be financed from C. furnish and equip. 35,000 new district-wide Fire Protection Facilities d. purchase apparatus: (new construction) Fee (1 ) pumper 150,000 ( 2) wild-land unit (power wagon) 75, 000 925, 000 total, non- recurring 2. Enlarge existing station a. design, construction new district-wide furnishings $ 270, 000 non-recur- Fire Protection ring Facilities (new construction) Fee Total Amount for $1 , 195,06-0 Five Year period, non-recurring 3. Add One Inspector position $ 68, 000#annually, on a recur- new district-wide ring basis Fire Suppression ( including Benefit Assessment, fringe ben. ) commencing with 1986-87 fiscal year grand total $1 , 535, 000 recurring and non- recurring over Five Year period *total for Five Year period: $34o, 000 851 W.ELDORADO DR. TELEPHONE: P.O.BOX 1700 191 61 666-4558 Robert M. Nyman WOODLAND.CA 95695 July 21, 1986 STATUS OF FIRE DISTRICT 5-YEAR PLANS Bethel Island -- financing plan prepared and provided to district. Only limited personnel financing feasible. Financing for other improvements not feasible at this time. Commissioners and Chief have not yet indicated their conclusions. Consolidated -- financing plan approved 'by Board of Supervisors. Implementation: work on new construction (developer) fee schedule underway; work on benefit assessment schedule underway; presentations have been made to all city .councils; a Mayor's committee is to review plan in further detail and. make recommendations to the Mayors and City Councils. East Diablo -- financing plan approved by Board of Supervisors and City Council of Brentwood. Implementation: findings report necessary to implement new construction(developer) fee drafted (to also be provided to City of Brentwood)'; work on:'benefit assessment schedule will be commenced after new construction fee implemented. Moraga -- newly appointed Fire Chief reviewing district's needs to see if original plan requires revisions. Oakley -- financing plan awaiting approval by Board of Supervisors. Work underway on findings report necessary to implement new construction (developer) fee schedule. Orinda -- financing plan prepared and provided to district. Commissioners and Mayor may not want to proceed with benefit assessment until the community has had a chance to address school financing issue. Riverview -- financing plan approved by the Board of Supervisors. Implementation: presentations have been made to both city councils; Pittsburg will consider again early in August; Antioch is requesting a joint committee with Pittsburg to coordinate city council considerations. Tassaiara- -- financing of improvements not feasible at this time. Commissioners and Fire Chief have met with consultant on his assessment. • 851 W.EL DORADO DR. •TELEPHONE: ' P.O.BOX 1700 19161666-4558 Robert M. Nyman WOODLAND.CA 95695 July 21, 1986 STATUS OF FIRE DISTRICT 5-YEAR PLANS Bethel Island -- financing plan prepared and provided to district. Only limited personnel financing feasible. Financing for other improvements not feasible at this time. Commissioners and Chief have not yet indicated their conclusions. Consolidated -- financing plan approved by 'Board of Supervisors. Implementation: work on new construction (developer) fee schedule underway; work on benefit assessment schedule underway; presentations have been made to all city councils; a Mayor's committee is to review plan in further detail and make recommendations to the Mayors and City Councils. East Diablo -- financing plan approved by Board of Supervisors and City Council of Brentwood. Implementation: findings report necessary to implement new construction(developer) fee drafted (to also be provided to City of Brentwood); work on benefit assessment schedule will be commenced after new construction fee implemented. Mora a -- newly appointed Fire Chief reviewing district's needs to see if original plan requires revisions. Oakley -- financing plan awaiting approval by Board of Supervisors. Work underway on- findings report necessary to implement new construction (developer) fee schedule. Orinda -- financing plan prepared and provided to district. Commissioners and Mayor may not want to proceed -with benefit assessment until the community has had a chance to address school financing issue. Riverview -- financing plan approved by the Board of.Supervisors. Implementation: presentations have been made to both city councils; Pittsburg will consider again early in August; Antioch is requesting a joint committee with Pittsburg to coordinate city council considerations. Tassajara -- financing of improvements not feasible at this time. Commissioners and Fire Chief have met with consultant on his assessment.