HomeMy WebLinkAboutMINUTES - 09131988 - F.C.2 TO: BOARD OF SUPERVISORS C61
ra
FROM: Finance Committee, Supervisor T. Powers I.JIJOlC1
and Supervisor R. Schroder ^
DATE: December 9,1987 ( /
SUBJECT: Fire District Capital Outlay Review Procedure
Specific Request(s) or Recommendations(s) & Background & Justification
RECOMMENDATION:
APPROVE the report of the Finance Committee recommending the attached
proposed guidelines for Fire District Capital Allocations as the basis for
recommending capital allocations from the Special District Augmentation
Fund and appoint Bob Nyman, fire district financing "consultant, ; as an
advisory member of the County Fire Chiefs' Association Capital Improvement
Committee.
BACKGROUND/REASONS FOR RECOMIUMATIONS:
At the conclusion of the 1986/1987 capital allocation process, the Board of
supervisors ordered that in future years, the capital allocation
recommendations of the County Fire Chief's Capital Improvement Committee be
referred to the Finance Committee for review prior td submission jto the
Board of Supervisors. Additionally, the Board referred to the Finance
Committee .for review the issue of the capital allocation'. review process.
In preparation of the review of the allocation process by the Finance
Committee, the County Administrator's Office requested the Capital
Improvement Committee to conduct a review of previous allocation practices
and changes suggested by Fire Districts and the County Administrator's
Office with the objective of developing revised written guidelines for the
allocation process. The County Administrator's Office took part in the
revAw and revision process. Additionally, Bob Nyman,' the County's fire
district financing consultant was asked to assist the Capital Improvement
.Committee in the review and development of allocation procedures.
The Capital Improvement Committee, Bob Nyman and the County Administrator's
Office representative met on several occasions to develop the proposals
contained in the attached guidelines. The proposed guidelines were
subsequently presented to the County Fire Chiefs' Association and were
approved by the Association on November 12, 1987.
CONTINUED ON ATTACHMENT: YES Signature:
Recommendation of County Administrator
Recommendation of Board Comnittee
Approve Other
l
Su ervisor T. Powers Supervisor R. chroder
Signature(s): //^^
Action of Board on:,Cy j�� /yp7Approved as Recommended 7L Other,.
Vote of Supervisors: I HEREBY CERTIFY THAT THIS IS A TRUE
AND CORRECT COPY OFAN ACTION TAKEN
Unanimous (Absent ) AND ENTERED ON THE MINUTES OF THE
Ayes: Noes: BOARD OF SUPERVISORS ON DATE SHOWN.
Absent: Abstain:
Attested:
cc: County Administrator Phil Batchelor, Clerk f
Auditor-Controller the Board of Supervisors
County Counsel and County Administrator
County & Independent Fire
Districts By: �.(J. �,� , DEPUTY
United Professional Firefighter's
Union, Local 1230
Bob Nyman
Fire District Capital Outlay Review Procedure
December 9, 1987
Page Two
on December 7, 1987 our Committee met with members of the Capital
Improvement Committee, Bob Nyman and the County Administrator's Office to
consider the proposed capital allocation guidelines and agreed to recommend
approval of the proposed review procedures.
In addition to the recommendations contained in the attached proposed
guidelines, it is our recommendation that Bob Nyman be 'added to theCapital
Improvement Committee as an advisory member to assist the Committee in the
review process. The Capital Improvement Committee felt that. Bob Nyman's
knowledge of fire district operations would be of value to the Committee
and would increase the level of objectivity of the review process.
It is our belief that the written proposed guidelines will correct or
eliminate many of the problems experienced with the allocation process in
prior years. The mere fact that the guidelines are in writing will
eliminate misunderstandings regarding the review process and criteria for
recommending capital allocations.
The proposal to dedicate funds to Category 'C' items for the purchase of
new equipment will benefit many districts that have been unable to purchase
new items because available funding has been absorbed by the 'A' land 'B'
category items.
The revised apparatus replacement guidelines recognize that. age alone. is
not the only determinant in evaluating the utility{ of vehicles. The
addition of the mileage criteria should result in' a more realistic
replacement policy.
Although the County Administrator's Office has been involved in the review
process over the past years, there has been a certain .,amount of criticism
about the objectiveness of the Committee. The addition of a knowledgeable
disinterested . person such as Bob Nyman to the Committee should
substantially eliminate that criticism.
'The United Professional Fire Fighters' Union was provided a copy; of the
proposed Finance Committee agenda and guidelines but declined to attend the
meeting or offer comments about the review process.
4
county of Contra Costa
` special District Augmentation Fund i
PROPOSED GUIDELINES FOR Fire District CAPITAL' (FI XED ASSET) !
ITEMS ALLOCATIONS
Background : the Board of Supervisors has instructed the County
Administrator and the Capital Improvements Committee to present
the proposed guidlines to be used in recommending capital
allocations for the 1987-88 fiscal year to the board 's Finance
Committee prior to the submission of the acutal recommended
allocations For 1987-88.
The chiefs serving on the Capital Improvements Committee and sthe
County Administrator 's representative have Indicated that they
want to review the proposed guidelines and related procedures
with the County Fire Chiefs Association members prior ' to
finalizing and presenting them to the Board's Finance Committee.
Once the proposed guidlines have been approved, they will become
the basis. for determining' the recommended allocations for `each :
district .
Proposed Guidelines: presented below are the proposed guidelines,
..along with the definitions and related procedures required to
apply the guidelines to. the capital requests that have already
been submitted for the 1987-88 fiscal year:
PROCESSING PROCEDURE
--------------------
' r
Using the approved guidelines, the Capital -Improvements
Committee will 'review each requested Item with the chief of
the -requesting district and arrive at its recommended
allocation. (When necessary.." & field review of the need for a
requested item will be conducted. ) The;; Committee ; will
provide a statement for each item not recommended for
allocation under one of the capital categories. Some -items
may require further study. In these cases, a statement to
that effect will be provided by the Committee.
Items not recommended for approval during any year many be
submitted again in a subsequent year.
i
Recommended allocations will be forwarded to the Board of
Supervisors' Finance Committee.
4
f
Hage 1
{
i
. D�lIMI�IONa
Capital equipment: as provided in the State Controller 's
accounting regulations, an item of capital equipment is a
movable fixed asset. It has a unit cost, including sales
tax, delivery and installation charges, of at least $500.
it is the unit cost that determines whether or not.-an item
is capital equipment, not the total amount of the proposed
order . (Equipment iteiss not classified as capital equipment
would be purchased from regular district operating funds. )
Land: all land acquisitions and land improvements are
capital projects, without regard to cost.
Structures and improvements: the following are capital
projects; new permanent structures, with a .cost of at least
$5,000; and additions to existing structures, structural
betterments and ground improvements each with a coat of at
least $5,000. (Lesser projects are 'not considered as capital
projects and would' be financed from regular district
operating funds. )
GUIDELINES to be used with Priority Categories
-----------------------------------------------
Category A,.
------------ acquisition of additional or
replacement capital equipment items required by ; CAL OSHA
regulations, or otherwise, for the protection of the health
and safety of district fire fighters. (Since all apparatus
and equipment is normally .utfed for the protection of the
public, this category relates only to the protection of fire
fighters. )
Quantities requested must be realistic and reasonable, based
on the problem to be corrected and such factors -as the size
of the district's service responsibilities, workload volume
and absence of viable alternatives.
Category B:
------------- acquisition of vehicles and
capital equipment for replacement of capital items which are
obsolete, uneconomical to operate or no longer 'serviceable
and;
replacement of.. or major
page 2
_W
tparking lots, etc. ) where necessary to protect the original
Investment or to maintain the usefulness of the item.
v In the case of apparatus, the following factors willr bit
considered in reviewing requests for replacement:
age, mileage, engine hours, condition, Cos ti, of
maintenance and operation, parts availability, frequency
of use, feasibility of re-powering or re=modeling.
u
The Committee will develop a recommended procedure ; and
guidelines to be used by the Committee in arriving at Its
recommended allocations for replacement of apparatus, other
vehicles and some equipment. (See ATTACHMENT. )
Category C:
------------ acquisition of net
additional vehicles and capital equipment not eligible for
consideration under above Categories A and B. �`
i
Note : an amount, of approximately 5% of the total avaihable
funds for all capital items may be recommended for this
category. (Any funds not -allocated for Categories A and B
would also be available for this category.)
Requested items must be logical additions,`; based on the
requesting district's service ' responsibilities, workload
volume and absence of viable alternatives. t
Because of the limited funds normally available for 4this
category, only the most me.ritorius of requests could be
expected to be recommended- for .allocation oC funds.
Category D:
---- land acq;uisltions and
land Improvements,. regardless of coat; and
new permanent structures,
additions, structural betterments and ground improvements,
with an individual project cost of at leaa`t $5,000 each.
Note : as these projects would not normally �be realistic for
consideration under the limited amount available each 'year
from the Special District Augmentation Fund, ! such
projects would undoubtedly have to be the subject of long-
term financing proposals using additional resources such as
new construction fees, general obligation bonds or special
taxes. (The County Administrator 's Office should, be
contacted about such special financing proposals. )
page 3
. •. l�AvvR� 6�L ht+w�wiri.ii+i .5..�+..r�.o...� .. +:'c.. o..=:��..+�.:wTrlii i 'iii ti+�r i ia�rr
ITS"
ii
Procedure:
Because of the recurring gap between the amount of funds
available for replacement of capital items and the amount of
requests for these funds, the Capital improvements
Committee, in the course of arriving at its recommended
allocations for replacement of these items, will ' need to
ensure that the limited funds are assigned where they will
provide -the greatest potential benefit to all; of the
citizens served by the'' participating diatticts. In. order to
do this, the committee will need to consider factors other
than the Justification provided for the requested replacement
lien and the replacement guidelines, where they have been
established .
The other factors .will include:
a . number (annual) of requesting district's alarms and
relative response times;
b. size and- type of district service responsibilities;
C. amount of and condition of relevant apparatus,
equipment or other property already immediately
available; and
d. mutual aid or other viable alternatives- to the
requested replacement.
REPLACEMENT GUIDELINES
Heavy Duty Apparatus (including heavy wild land Units) :
--------------------------------------------------------
Age (years) Road Niles
- 30 regardless of mileage
25+ and 251000+
20+ and 501000+
15+ and 75,000+
10+ and 1001000+
other considerations: _
page 1
units: _
--------------------------------------------- ----
20 regardless of mileage
15+ and is 000-cr
10+ and 20,000+
Other considerations: I
Light vehicles (sedans, pick-ups, etc. ) :
----------------------------------------
20 regardless of smileage
15+ and 50,000+
10+ and 75,000+
5+ and 10080004
Other considerations:
* such as engine hours, general condition, cost of
maintenance and operation, parts availability and feasibility
of re-powering and re-modeling may be applied byi the
committee in evaluating the justification for ' the
replacement or over-hauling of a capital ite, a.
Equipment- (partial listing) :
- -----------------------------
Item Replacement Guideline
Radio equipment 15 years age
Resuscitator
ATTACHMENT
j
page 2
ii
OFFICE OF COUNTY ADMINISTRATOR
CONTRA COSTA COUNTY
Administration Building
Martinez, California
i
Finance Committee
To: Supervisor Nancy Fanden Date: August 24, 1'988
Supervisor Tom Torlakson
Frorrphil Batchelor, Subject RODEO-HERCULES FIRE PROTECTION
County Administrator DISTRICT CAPITAL OUTLAY RESERVE
RECOMMENDATION
Request the Rodeo-Hercules Fire Protection District to transfer the
funds in its Capital Outlay Reserve Fund in the approximate amount of
$98,000 to its operating budget to be applied toward its operating
budget requirements for fiscal year 1988-1989.
Financial Impact:
Approval of the recommendation will reduce the demands on the Special
District Augmentation Fund and result in the availability of an
additional $98,000 ,for .allocation for other purposes.
BACKGROUND/REASONS .FOR RECOMMENDATION:
Earlier this year it was discovered that the Rodeo-Hercules Fire
Protection District had accumulated a capital outlay reserve fund over
a two-year period by inaccurately reporting year-end .fund balances in
the 1986-1987 and 1987-1988 budget cycles. In each of those two
budget cycles, portions of year-end fund balances were transferred by
the District into a capital outlay reserve fund. This action had the
effect of understating the amount of carryover balance used to finance
the coming year' s budget, which in turn necessitated allocating an
additional amount from the Special District Augmentation Fund to
balance the operations, budget of the District in those two fiscal
years.
The subject capital outlay fund established with prior year carryover
funds, while not being illegal or inherently improper, does present
problems from the standpoint of equity and credibility between; this
office and the other fire districts of the County. Budget and Special
District Augmentation Fund allocation policies established by the
County Administrator' s Office, ratified by your Board and followed by
the fire districts preclude the establishment and funding of reserve
funds. The budget process requires that all carryover funds be
applied towards funding the following year' s budget. ;, All of the fire
districts applying for Augmentation Funds are aware of this procedure,
and to the best of their ability, accurately report carryover funds
t
4
Finance Committee -2- August 24, 1988
.with the knowledge that carryover funds will be applied towards the
coming year' s budget.
The District has proposed that it be allowed to use the $98,000 for
communications equipment and station furnishings for the new .Hercules
station. However, since the Special District Augmentation Fund
provides resources for capital items, it is our view that the District
should submit its request for capital to the County Fire Chiefs'
Capital Improvement Committee. If the needed items do not meet the
criteria of the Chiefs' Committee, the District should consider
utilizing funds raised either through the development fee or the
benefit assessment established approximately one year ago.
The Board referral regarding this item suggested a review of the
process and procedures involved in the allocation of special district
augmentation funds.
Approximately one and a half years ago the Capital Improvement
Committee, in conjunction with the County's fire district' consultant
and the County Administrator's Office, developed written procedures
and criteria for reviewing, capital outlay requests. The' procedures
were approved by the County Fire Chiefs' Association, the Finance
Committee and the Board of Supervisors.
.Attached is a copy of the Board Order and guidelines outlining the
current process used by our office and the Chiefs' Committee--in -
reviewing
ommittee-in -reviewing requests for funding. We think this process is a
significant improvement over the process used in the past and
recommend that it be 'continued in 1988-89.
PB:TJM:gm
cc: County Administrator
Auditor-Controller
Rodeo-Hercules Fire Protection District
Capital Improvement Committee
t
AGENDA
FINANCE COMMITTEE
Monday, August 29, 1988 at 9: 30 a.m.
4th Floor Conference Room
1. 9: 30 - 10: 00 Consider Rodeo Hercules Fire
Protection Request to 'reserve
$98 ,000 of fund balance
for capital outlay.