Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAboutMINUTES - 08011989 - 1.6 (2) M 1-060 TO;. BOARD OF SUPERVISORS FROM: GARY VILLALBA Contra VETERANS SERVICE OFFICER Costa DATE: AUGUST 1, 1989 09 County� SUBJECT: RESPONSE TO THE GRAND JURY FINAL REPORT OF 1987-1988 TASK FORCE ON FUTURE USE OF VETERANS' BUILDINGS IN CONTRA COSTA COUNTY SPECIFIC REQUEST(S) OR RECOMMENDATION(S) & BACKGROUND AND JUSTIFICATION RECOMMENDATIONS 1 . Receive the Report of Task Force on Future Use of Veterans' Buildings in Contra Costa County. 2 . Direct the County General Services Department to meet with each building manager of the 12 Veterans' Memorial Buildings to discuss the concerns of the members of the Task Force. 3 . Acknowledge by receipt of this report the Board reaffirmation of the County' s position supporting the use of the Memorial Buildings primarily by recognized veterans organizations . BACKGROUND In response to the 1987-1988 Grand Jury Report, the Board of Supervisors designated the Veterans Service Officer to set up a Task Force regarding the future use of the Veterans Memorial Buildings . You directed that the Task Force be composed of representa- tives of veterans organizations, county staff, staff from the cities in which the veterans buildings are located, and members of past Grand Juries . Invitations and questionnaires were sent to 120 individuals, officials and organizations . The goal of the Task Force was to generate cooperative and positive ideas and suggestions to enhance the utilization, management and maintenance of the buildings to provide the best service to the veteran community and the general public . The Task Force had no policymaking authority but acted only in an advisory capacity. The meeting was held June 9 , 1989 in Concord, California with 34 participants attending. GARY VILLALBA CONTINUED ON ATTACHMENT; X YES SIGNATURE: RECOMMENDATION OF COUNTY ADMINISTRATOR RECOMMENDATION OF BOARD COMMITTEE APPROVE OTHER S 1GNATUREIS 1: ACTION OF BOARD ON August 1, 1989 APPROVED AS RECOMMENDED _]S` OTHER X The Report is further REFERRED to the Internal Operations Committee VOTE OF SUPERVISORS I HEREBY CERTIFY THAT THIS IS A TRUE UNANIMOUS (ABSENT ) AND CORRECT COPY OF AN ACTION TAKEN AYES: NOES'. AND ENTERED ON THE MINUTES OF THE BOARD ABSENT: ABSTAIN: OF SUPERVISORS ON THE DATE SHOWN. 1986-1987 Grand Jury AUG 1 1989 cc: 1987-1988 Grand Jury ATTESTED _ 1988-1989 Grand Jury PHIL BATCHELOR. CLERK OF THE BOARD OF Task Force Members SUPERVISORS AND COUNTY ADMINISTRATOR Co. Administrator Director, General Services M382/7-83 Co. Counsel BY (� DEPU.n, Veterans Service Officer Veterans' Resources Center Contra Gary D. Villalba Service Officer 100 -37th Street Costa 2425 Bisso lane Richmond,California 94805-2179 ❑ � Suite 105 (415)374-3241 COUnty Concord,California 94520 (415)646-5114 Report Task Force on Future Use of Veterans' Buildings in Contra Costa County Meeting of June 9 , 1989 , 9 A.M. 2425 Bisso Lane, Concord, CA The following were present at the Task Force meeting: Veterans Organizations : James C. Austin, Veterans of Foreign Wars, 25th District Commander Margaret Berdan, Veterans Board, Richmond John Donahue, Disabled American Veterans Chapter 154 , Commander, VFW Post 1898 Jerry Evans, Veterans of Foreign Wars, Post 1525 Kenneth Graedel, The American Legion, Post 171 William H. Hall, The American Legion Post 161 and Veterans Memorial Building, Antioch Richard J. Hinkson, Building Committee, Veterans Memorial Building, Walnut Creek, American Legion Post 115, VFW Post 1052 Thaddeus L. Holmes, The American Legion John Jendeski, Veterans of Foreign Wars and American Legion, Post 171 Ted D. Lewis, Veterans of Foreign Wars Brent MacInnis, Disabled American Veterans Dr. Matthews, Disabled American Veterans George May, The American Legion David A. McDonald, Lafayette War Vets, Inc . , The American Legion Post 517 , Disabled American Veterans Chapter 154 , Veterans of Foreign Wars Post 8063 , Military Order of the Purple Heart No. 383 Ken Miller, The American Legion, 9th District Commander Robert E . Miller, Regional President, West Coast, Fleet Reserve Association Fred Morgan, Manager, Danville Veterans Building Walter Pack, The American Legion Clifford Reeves, Veterans of Foreign Wars, 25th District Elmer R. Rieger, former County Veterans Service Officer Robert Rinehart, Amvets George C. Sciacqua, Lafayette Veterans Memorial Building Jim Vincent, American Legion Post 517 , Lafayette James W. Zufall, The American Legion Post 115 2 . City Representatives : Janette Howell , Town of Danville Sam McConnell, City of Lafayette Mayor Evelyn M. Munn, City of Walnut Creek County Representatives : Dick Awenius, County Lease Management DeRoyce Bell, Deputy County Administrator John Gregory, Management Analyst, County Administrator ' Dorothy Harkness, Veterans Resources Center Robert Rygh, Assistant Director, General Services Scott Tandy, Chief Assistant County Administrator Gary Villalba, Veterans Service Officer Findings: 1 . Consensus was that selling or consolidating the veterans buildings would be unacceptable because the buildings are memorials and sacred to the veteran community. Also, some properties were donated for Veterans Memorial Building use and, therefore, if sold, the properties might revert back to the estate of the donor. 2 . Improved communication is needed between the Lease Management Division of the County General Services Department and the designated managers of the 12 Veterans Memorial Buildings . It will be the responsibility of the veterans building managers to: a. Disseminate information/communications from the county to the various organizations using the buildings . b. Solicit input from . the veterans organizations as to the concerns, problems, and ideas that they wish to convey to Lease Management. C . Relay information back to Lease Management. 3 . The county will improve response time to building managers regarding their inquiries on problems and issues with the buildings . 4 . Lease Management has agreed to set up meetings with the individual managers in the future to enhance the communication process . 5 . The county has pledged to share information with the building managers regarding possible block grants or other funding sources available for the buildings . 3 . 6 . Several members of the Task Force feel that the county has the authority to exercise the use of a special "mil" tax for generating funds for the maintenance of the buildings . It was the understanding of the county representatives at the meeting that this "mil" tax is prohibited because of Proposition 13 . However, the General Services Department agreed to research this issue and get back to the building managers with its findings . 7 . Lease Management agreed to assist the veterans building managers in gathering information as to alternatives for their high-cost liability insurance; for example, one insurance provider underwriting a policy for all 12 buildings in an effort to reduce this prohibitive cost. 8 . Concern was expressed that the current lease agreements contain difficult-to-understand language and Lease Management responded with a commitment to review the agreements for obsolete terminology, etc . 9 . Short and long-term objectives should be developed by Lease Management and the building managers to deal with property and maintenance issues (such as handicap access) for each building and develop a schedule to achieve the above. Other Concerns : 1 . A few of the Task Force members expressed the view that the county was not meeting its responsibility with regard to adequate maintenance of the buildings . For example, Mr. John Donahue, a member of the Task Force, presented a letter (copy attached) that he wrote to the District Attorney requesting investigation into the charge that the county was not meeting its mandated responsibility for the maintenance of the buildings . The Veteran Service Officer suggested to Mr. Donahue that section 1190(c) of the Military and Veterans Code of California, mentioned in the attached letter to the District Attorney, refers to the powers of memorial districts . Mr. Donahue was informed that there are no memorial districts in Contra Costa County. 2 . Veteran representatives of the Lafayette veterans building shared their view that the county has been responsive, cooperative and supportive in dealing with their concerns . 3 . County officials re-emphasized their position that the county has always been supportive of the veterans ' organizations as the principal users of the buildings . The buildings are not going to be taken away from the veterans' . organizations . 4 . Note: On July -7 , 1989, the Governor signed SB 544 which specifies that facilities for the use or benefit of one or more veterans associations and their acceptance by a veterans ' association constitutes a dedication to a public purpose and that the county may not revoke the dedication so long as the veterans association has not violated the terms and conditions of the dedication, unless it dedicates substitute facilities or the veterans organization has consented to the county action or abandoned its use of the facility. 4 . Town of Danville representative, Janette Howell , and the Veterans' Building Manager, Fred Morgan, presented their unique agreement which allows Danville officials to manage and maintain the building for the veteran organizations with the protection that the veterans reserve priority as the principal users of the building. It was noted that this successful relationship, which allows for optimal use of the building, is based upon effective communication, mutual cooperation and respect between veteran organizations and town officials . 5 . Some Task Force members mentioned the possibility of establishing a Veterans Memorial District. The procedures for the establishment of Veterans Memorial Districts are promulgated in Sections 1170 through 1259 of the Military and Veterans Code of California. Essentially, a Memorial District may be established by a petition of a specified percentage of electors and approval by a majority of the voters in a district formation election. This would have to be pursued by the veterans organizations . 6 . No other meetings were scheduled. Although some participants expressed a desire for the Task Force to meet in the future, there was not a consensus as to the need for future meetings . Conclusion• Most Task Force members shared a common understanding that the issues are complex, especially in view of the limited resources . It, was generally agreed that the meeting was productive in that it provided a forum for an honest exchange of ideas and concerns . The exchange has resulted in a new era of communication and responsiveness between the county and the veterans organizations pertaining to the use and maintenance of the Veteran Memorial Buildings . Respectfully, Gary Villalba Meeting Moderator ' Veterans Service Officer li June 1 , 1989 MD SUN .� Ies TO: District Attorney, Contra Costa County P.O. sox 670 VETERANS RESOURCES CENTER County Court House CONCORD, CAUFORNiA Martinez, CA 94553 SUBJECT: Future of Veteran's Memorial Buildings in Contra Costa County. The Disabled American Veterans, Mt. Diablo Chapter 154 , Concord, CA request. your assistance in accordance with the state of California law, division 6, Veteran's Building and Memorials District, Chapter 1, Article 2, Section 1190 (C) . "Call upon the district attorney for legal advice and assistance in all matters concerning the district." In this case the district is Contra Costa County. Chapter 2, Section 1262 as referred to in the Contra Costa County grand jury report 1987-88 in including paragraph 25. In summary, the state law mandates the county. Responsibility for veteran's facilities and their repair and maintenance, yet the county has consistently forced their responsibility on the veterans. Attached is the resolution that will be presented to the June 7, 1989 convention of all Disabled American Veteran's chapters in California. It will also be presented at the convention in Bakersfield, June 17, 1989 of the Veterans of Foreign Wars. On June 9, 1989, at the Veterans of Foreign Resource Center, 2425 Bisso Lane, Concord, CA a "Task Force" meeting as requested by the grand jury will take place. In summary the county continues to violate the state law and in a unanimous vote of Disabled American Veterans, Chapter 154, Concord, CA we request the office of district attorney legal assistance. JOHN E. DONAHUE, COMMANDER JOHN E. DONAHUE, CHAIRMAN VETERANS OF FOREIGN WARS HOUSE COMMITTEE POST 1898 DISABLED AMERICAN VETERANS PITTSBURG, CA 94565 750 CENTRAL AVE. PITTSBURG, CA 94565 ,. CI1+4eTce rr, Ler DISABLED AMERICAN VETERANS MT. DMO CHAPTER 154 -CONCORD CALIFORNIA $ENTHM WHO SEIM FaNCL CN MUM OF VErERM MMIAL BUILDINGS IN 00RIM 009rA 00MY *EREAS• Sane months ago, Alameda County and the City of Berkeley were served ice that they must vacate their respective Manorial Buildings. WHEREAS- Veterans Manorial Buildings located in Antioch, Brentwood Concord, Lit, Danville, E1 Cerrito, Lafayette, Martinez, Pittsburg, RicEinond, Rodeo and Walnut Creek the buildings in question were paid for by Contra Costa County tax payers in memory of the veterans who gave the "Last Full Measure" for their country, AND *EREAS• The Grand Jury report of March 1988 cited the Military and Veterans Code: sect ion 1262 is the county's authority in providing buildings for the use and benefit of veterans-----and for their repair and maintenance, AND WHEREAS• The STate Code 2062 authorizes the county to maintain these build- urtrrthe vitehe the S sl Buildings edopvtproand rthecitesto� .# " pervisoremandattprovide roperr maintenance for Manorial Buildings." AND WHEREAS . • The County Office of Rish Mommnent establishes that the veterans must carry public liability insurance policy of $500,000.00 at a cost of $181.00 Per fi�iall bas urrdenon ttheiAnmericGrand LeLegion Post in Pittsbbuurrgltoo the extentthiaaced tt It can no longer pay the cost of insurance, maintenance or utility bills, leading to the danise of that post. qND • The County Administrators Office has no plans to actually carry out The W a�ury Report other than to create a task force. Over the years, other Grand Judy Reports have had similar reaamrclations but no relief for the Veteran Organizations have been forth caning, It has been said in the State Code by the Grand Jury and by the County Supervisors 'Rat we, the people, owe our thanks and gratitude to these veterans and we will and have constructed facilities throughout our county for than to meet and they shall be maintained." - 2 - TF UORE BE IT RESOLVED- That the oouity needs to read the Grand Jury Report o r mp anent its bions to include the 0ssMtion of the posts of liability insurance for the Mamrial Buildings and rewrite existing leases deleting sections 8A, C, D, E-13 in'total, 14 in total, 15 in total and 16-22 in total. The County Board of Supervisors should reassure the veterans, veterans organi- zations and District Camunders of Veterans Organizations that the twelve M3mrial Veterans Buildings will ranain for the use of veterans and that the Veteran Organizations utilizing such buildings will have the FINAL say as to the buildings future.