HomeMy WebLinkAboutMINUTES - 08102004 - C36-C45 TO: BOARD OF SUPERVISORS
William Walker, M. D. , Health Services Director
FROM: By: Jacqueline Pigg, Contracts Administrator
Contra
July 23, 2004 Costa
DATE: County
SUBJECT: Approval of Contract #26-995-2 with George Lee, M. D. 31P
SPECIFIC REQUEST{S)OR RECOMMENDATION(S)&BACKGROUND AND JUSTIFICATION
RECOI+IbMMATI N M
Approve and authorize the Health Services Director, or his
designee, (Jeff Smith, M. D. ) to execute on behalf of the County,
Contract #26-995-2 with George Lee, M. D. , self-employed individual,
(Specialty: Anesthesiology) , in the amount not to exceed $990, 000,
to provide Professional Anesthesiology Services for the period from
September 1, 2004 through August 31, 2007 .
FISCAL IMPACT'
Cost to the County depends upon utilization. As appropriate,
patients and/or third party payors will be billed for services.
BAQ&QBQpMtZREASON(S1 FOR RECMDENDATIONS:
For a number of years the County has contracted with Medical and
Dental Specialists to provide specialized professional services,
which are not otherwise available in its hospital and clinics.
On October 14 2002, the County Administrator approved and the
Purchasing Services Manager executed Contract #26-995' (as amended
by Contract Amendment Agreement #26-995-1) with George Lee, M. D. ,
to provide Anesthesiology services, including consultation,
training, in-house on--call coverage services for the General and
Obstetric Units, and medical and/or surgical procedures, for Contra
Costa Regional Medical Center, in the amount of $600, 000 for the
period from August 12, 2002 through August 31, 2004 .
Approval of Contract #26 -995-2 will allow Contractor to continue to
provide Anesthesiology services through August 31, 2007 .
0
CONTINUEDTA Y i
RECOMMENDATION OF COUNTY ADMINISTRATOR RECOM 1DAT IN OF BOARD COMMITTEE
APPROVEN OTHER +�
s
SIGNATURE(S):
ACTION OF BOARD APPROVED AS RECOMMENDED OTHER
VOTE OF SUPERVISORS
I HEREBY CERTIFY THAT THIS IS A TRUE
UNANIMOUS (ABSENT ) AND CORRECT COPY OF AN ACTION TAKEN
AYES: s NOES: AND ENTERED ON THE MINUTES OF THE BOARD
ABSENT: r- ABSTAIN: OF SUPERVISORS ON THE DATE SHOWN.
ATTESTED AUGu'1 kc)
,i2ay
JOHN SWEETEN,CLERK OF THE BOARD OF
e f f Smith M. D SUPERVISORS AND COUNTY ADMINISTRATOR
Contact Persoe (3 7 0-5113)
CC: Health Services Dept. (Contracts)
Auditor-Controller
Risk Management BY �WU, 'Y`1.r . DEPUTY
Contractor
TO: BOARD OF SUPERVISORS
VAJ
FROM: William Walker,M.D.,Health Services Director Contra
By: Jacqueline Pigg, Contracts Administrator Costa
DATE: July 29, 2004 ounty
SUBJECT: Approval of Contracts with Medi-Cal Mental Health Specialty Providers
SPECIFIC REQUEST(S)OR RECOMMENDATION(S)&BACKGROUND AND JUSTIFICATION
RECOMMENDATION{S):
Approve and authorize the Health Services Director, or his designee (Donna Wigand) to execute on
behalf of the County, Contracts specified on the attached Addendum, in an amount not to exceed
$50,000,to continue to provide Medi-Cal mental health specialty services for the period from July 1,
2004 through June 30, 2006.
FISCAL IMPACT:
These Contracts are funded by 49%State and 51% Federal FFP Medi-Cal Funds.
BACKGROUND/REASON(S)FOR RECOMMENDATION(S):
On January 14, 1997, the Board of Supervisors adopted Resolution#97/17, authorizing the Health
Services Director to contract with the State Department of Mental Health to assume responsibility
for Medi-Cal mental health specialty services. Responsibility for outpatient mental health
specialty services involves contracts with individual, group and organizational providers to
deliver these services.
Approval of this Board Order will allow the Contractors to continue providing Medi-Cal mental
health specialty services through June 30,2006.
r
CONTINUED ON AT A NT Y
RECOMMENDATION OF COUNTY ADMINISTRATOR REC ME ATION OF BOARD COMMITTEE
APPROVE OTHER
S1( ATURE(
ACTION OF BOARD{ APPROVED AS RECOMMENDED OTHER
i
VOTE OF SUPERVISORS
I HEREBY CERTIFY THAT THIS IS A TRUE
UNANIMOUS (ABSENT �'' } AND CORRECT COPY OF AN ACTION TAKEN
AYES: _ 11 NOES: r AND ENTERED ON THE MINUTES OF THE BOARD
ABSENT: �- ABSTAIN: OF SUPERVISORS ON THE DATE SHOWN.
ATTESTED -us-r /0 °
_
r
JOHN SWEETEN,CLERK OF THE BOARD OF
SUPERVISORS AND COUNTY ADMINISTRATOR
Contact Person: Do
CC: Health ServlcesnaV6 p1.d(Contracts) 957-5111
Auditor-Controller
Risk Management BY � -- DEPUTY
Contractor
l
Board Order
Page 2
Contractor Contract Number
Khalil Rahmany,Ph.D. 24-950-31(5)
Holly S. Reed, MFT 24-949-76(6)
Rosemarie Ratto,Ph.D. 24-949-21(6)
Amy Presley, MFT 74-108-28(3)
Cathy Parker, LCSW 74-108-21(2)
James Pratt, Ed.D. 74-184-46(1)
Barbara S. Platin,MFT 74-108-61(2)
Jacqueline Richard,MFT 24-939-60(6)
Tanya Roberts, LCSW 74-184-54(1)
Camille R.eineke,PH.D. 74-108-90(2)
Isadore Morrison,MFT 74-184-83(1)
Dale Rowden, LCSW 74-184-81(1)
Louis Roussel, Ph.D. 74-184-35(1)
Nancy Sallee,MFT 74-184-32(1)
Jean Shanahan,MFT 74-184-13(2)
Rosalind Ruhl,MFT 74-108-79(2)
Deborah P. Rogers,MFT 74-108-72(2)
Gilbert Sheppard,MFT 74-108-48(2)
Karen Sellinger,MFT 74-108-10(3)
John Rostkowski,M.D. 24-939-8(6)
Wesley Robinson,Ph.D. 24-939-12(3)
Luisito Roxas,M.D. 24-949-68(4)
Alan Scott, M.D. 24-939-36(6)
Charlie Ruff, MFT 74-184-29(1)
TO: BOARD OF SUPERVISORS ,,.::-_� -_._, CONTRA
- . A: COSTA
FROM: Emma Kuevor a COUNTY
Affirmative Action Officer
DATE: August 'I0, 2004 4.I
SUBJECT: ADDITION OF UNIONS TO THE EQUAL EMPLOYMENT
OPPORTUNITY ADVISORY COUNCIL
SPECIFIC REQUEST(S)OR RECOMMENDATION(S)&BACKGROUND AND JUSTIFICATION
Recommendation:
Adding three unions into the rotation for the existing union seats on the Equal Employment
Opportunity Advisory Council.
Financia[ Impact:
None.
Background:
The Equal Employment Opportunity Advisory Council was established July 9, 1991 with eleven
members representing community groups, businesses, disabled community, labor involved in
training programs, management and unions.
Unions have been merged (Appraisers) into other unions (AFSCNIE 512) and new unions
have been formed. Three unions must be added to the list of unions to be rotated to serve as
members on the Equal Employment Opportunity Advisory Council. The unions are:
• Physicians & dentists
• Western Council of Engineers
• United chief Officers Association
CONTINUED ON ATTACHMENT: X YES SIGNATURE: ` �t
-49COMMENDATION OF COUNTY ADMINISTRATOR RECOMMENDATION OF BOARD COMMITTEE
__,-/ PROVE OTHER
r
SIGNATURE(S): ?k '..��� lc—e ,
ACTION OF SOAA ON 1jU-aV-4,k 10, •2W APPROVED AS RECOMMENDED "OTISR7
VOTE OF SUPERVISORS
1 HEREBY CERTIFY THAT THIS IS A TRUE
UNANIMOUS(ABSENT }; ) AND CORRECT COPY OF AN ACTION TAKEN
AYES: NOES: AND ENTERED ON MINUTES OF THE BOARD
ABSENT: ABSTAIN: OF SUPERVISORS ON THE DATE SHOWN.
Contact:Emma Kuevor 335-9045
Cc: Emma Kuevor,Affirmative Action Officer }� fff
Patti Malloy,Clerk of the Board ATTESTED . 604
John Sweeten,CLEA OF THE BOA D OF
SUPERVISORS AND COUNTY ADMINISTRATOR
BYE - DEPUTY
TO: BOARD OF SUPERVISORSContra
t,.
,.
FROM: Warren E. Rupf, Sheriff ; Costa
a
DATE: July 29, 2004 .. t
- ' y
SUBJECT: Setting Special Tax Levy for County Service Areas P-2, Zone A 0, 0361
(Blackhawk); P-2, Zane B (Alamo); and P-5 (Roundhill)
SPECIFIC REQUEST(S)OR RECOMMENDATION(S)&BACKGROUND AND JUSTIFICATION
RECOMMENDATION:
SET the Special Tax for Police Services in the County Services Areas for the Fiscal Year 2004/05
as follows:
P-2 A(Blackhawk): Single residential: $ 178 per parcel, per year
Small multiple residential: $ 187 per parcel, per year
Large multiple residential: $ 196 per parcel, per year
Commercial/Industrial/Institutional: $ 960 per parcel, per year
Commercial/Theater: $ 4,800 per parcel, per year
P-2 Zone B (Alamo): Residential: $ 18 per parcel, per year
Small Multiple Residential: $ 27 per parcel, per year
Large Multiple Residential: $ 36 per parcel, per year
Commercial/Industrial/Institutional: $ 54 per parcel, per year
P-5 (Roundhill): Residential: $ 330 per parcel, per year
Commercial/Residential: $ 360 per parcel, per year
BACKGROUND:
The above action for County Service Area P-2 Zone A is required by County Ordinance 95-55.
The rates are the same as those in effect for fiscal year 2003/04. Setting the Special Tax for
Police Services at these rates will permit the Sheriff to continue to provide police services in the
Blackhawk Area. It is estimated that the special tax levy will raise approximately $530,000 for
fiscal year 2004/2005.
CONTINUED ON ATTACHMENT: X YES SIGNATURE:
[-RECOMMENDATION OF COUNTY ADMINISTRATOR M RECOMMENDATION OF BOARD COMMITTEE
[EI-APPROVE [I OTHER
SIGNATURE(S).
ACTION OF 130 D ON
APPROVED AS RECOMMENDED id-OTHERE]
VOTE 1 HERESY CERTIFY THAT THIS IS A TRUE AND
CORRECT COPY OF AN ACTION TAKEN AND
_UNANIMOUS(ABSENT Yl ) ENTERED ON THE MINUTES OF THE BOARD OF
AYES: NOES:
SUPERVISORS ON THE DATE SHOWN.
ABSENT: ABSTAIN: ATTESTED
Contact: Gloria Sutter 335-1526 JOHN SWEE7iN,CLERK OF THE BOARD OF
cc: Office of the Sheriff SUPERVISORS AND COUNTY ADMINISTRATOR
CAO—Justice System Administration 14 x
By: i�. , Deputy
2
The above action for County Service Area P-2 Zone B, is required by County Ordinance 81-16.
The rates are the same as those in effect for fiscal year 2003104. Setting the Special Tax for
Police Services at these rates will permit the Sheriff to continue to provide police services in the
Alamo area. It is estimated that the special tax levy will raise approximately $57,000 for fiscal
year 2004/2005.
The above action for County Service Area P-5, is required by County Ordinance 80-68. The
rates are the same as those in effect for fiscal year 2004/04. Setting the Special Tax for Police
Services at these rates will permit the Sheriff to continue to provide police services in the
Roundhill area. It is estimated that the special tax levy will raise approximately $238,000 for
fiscal year 2004/05.
To: BOARD OF SUPERVISORS `. CONTRA
FROM: BARTON J. GILBERT, DIRECTOR OF GENERAL SERVICES COSTA
DATE: AUGUST 10, 2004 COUNTY
SUBJECT: DISPOSAL OF SURPLUS PROPERTY
SPECIFIC REQUEST(S)OR RECOMMENDATION(S)&BACKGROUND AND JUSTIFICATION
RECOMMENDATION
DECLARE as surplus and authorize the Purchasing Agent, or designee, to dispose of equipment no
longer needed for public use as specifically set forth in the attachment to this Board Carder.
FINANCIAL IMPACT
There is no financial impact associated with approval of the recommended action.
BACKGROUND
Section 1108-2.212 of the County Ordinance Code authorizes the Purchasing Agent to dispose of
any personal property belonging to Contra Costa County and found by the Board of Supervisors not
to be required for public use. The property for disposal is either obsolete, worn out, beyond
economical repair, or damaged beyond repair.
884ffINWE-9 Will ATTACHMENT: X YES SIGNATURE.
&At��
�.�RECOMMENDATION OF COUNTY ADMINISTRATOR RECOMMENDATION OF BOARD COMMITTEE
dPPROVE _OTHER
r
SIGNATURE(S)::
ACTION OF BOARG APPROVED AS RECOMMENDED 49+1614-..4
Fl.
VOTE OF SUPERVISORS
V UNANIMOUS(ABSENT �t�e O L)' }
AYES: NOES:
ABSENTS: ABSTAIN:
MEDIA CONTACT:BARTON J.GILBERT(313-7100)
Originating Dept.:General Services Department E HEREBY CERTIFY THAT THIS IS A TRUE
Purchasing Division
CC: Genera!Services Department AND CORRECT COPY OF AN ACTION TAKEN
Accounting AND ENTERED ON THE MINUTES OF THE BOARD
Administration OF SUPERVISORS ON THE DATE SHOWN.
County Administrator's Office
GSD Fleet(via Purch) ATTESTED
Public Services(via Punch) JOHN SWE N,CLERK OFT E BOARD OF SUPERVISORS
Sheri Vvia P(via Punch) AND CO NTY ADMINISTRATOR
Sheriff(via Porch) �,
DEPUTY
G:1SharedlBOARD ORDERS108-10-04 Fleet Board Order.doc MS:ms M382(10186)
DISPOSAL OF SURPLUS PROPERTY AUGUST 10, 2004
Department Equipt. l Unit Make/ Year Serial Number Mirage Condition
I.D. Model e,
worn oouut
G. Beyond economical repair
D Damaged be and ra air
General Svcs-Fleet 0100 FORD 1997 ; 1FALP10P8VW310421 72,780 B
s
i General Svcs-Fleet 0101 FORD 1997 IFALPIOP5VW3I0425 68,082 B
General Svcs-Fleet 0102 FORD 1997 IFALPIOPIVW310423 68,607 B
General Svcs-Fleet 0196 FORD 1997 IFALPIOPXVW310419 70,681 B
General Svcs-Grounds 5625 FORD 1993 2FTJW35M3PCA52001 i 194,736 B
Health Svcs 5835 FORD 1990 1FMDA3lX7LZB81749 110,764 D
Public Works-Read 6330 CHEVROLE 2000 1GBKC34F5Y'F411729 37,707 D
T
Sheriff 0558 FORD 1999 1FAFP52U3XG154194 63,190 D
Sheriff 2043 FORD 2000 2FAFP71W9YX153481 34,628 B
E
Sheriff 9002 TAYLOR 1991 98133 N/A j A
DUNN I I
Sheriff 9512 PROWLER 1986 IECIJ2025GI539419 N/A B
i i
TO: BOARD OF SUPERVISORS `''o n t ra
Costa
FROM: FISH AND WILDLIFE COMMITTEE ',
County
DATE: August 10, 2003
SUBJECT: AUTHORIZATION FOR HOSTING A BBQ MEETING TO DISCUSS FISH AND WILDLIFE
RELATED REGULATIONS IN CONTRA COSTA COUNTY
SPECIFIC REMEST(S)OR RECOMMENDATION(S) & BACKGROUND AND JUSTIFICATION
RECOMMENDATIONS
AUTHORIZE the Fish and Wildlife Committee to host the fifth Annual BBQ for law
enforcement agencies to discuss fish and wildlife related regulations in Contra Costa County
and to spend no more than $600.00 from the Fish and Wildlife Propagation Fund for this
purpose.
FISCAL IMPACT
No impact to the general fund. No more than$600.00 from the Fish and Wildlife Propagation
Funds will be used to cover any expenses that are not donated. State law defines how
money in this fund may be spent, but the Board of Supervisors is responsible for authorizing
specific expenditures. The fish and wildlife education component of the BBQ is consistent
with the expenditure criteria established by State Law.
REASON FOR RECOMMENDATION/BACKGROUND
A specific component of the Fish and Wildlife Committee's charge is to advise the Board of
Supervisors on issues related to the enforcement of regulations protecting fish and wildlife.
Since 1997, the Committee has received quarterly reports with summary and detailed
information on the issuance and prosecution of citations for offenses such as poaching,
fishing without a license, and illegal disposals. The Committee has also participated in a
number of discussions with law enforcement agencies on the challenges and needs for
protecting resources from illegal activities. The annual BBQ has become a successful means
for improving coordination on enforcement issues and providing all involved with information
on the valuable fish and wildlife resources in the County.
o'
CONTINUED ON ATTACHMENT: X YES SIGNATURE: r { fit f ,`�� ; 1` c
? � f
Gordon Becker
Chair, Fish&Wildlife Committee
RECOMMENDATION OF COUNTY ADMINISTRATOR_RECOMMENDATION OF BOARD COMMITTEE
APPROVE OTHER
SIGNATURE(S):
ACTION OF BO D,�N ZPAPPROVED A5 RECOMMENDED O
VOTE OF SUPERVISORS
_ UNANIMOUS (ABSENT a rt -
AYES: NOES: I HEREBY CERTIFY THAT THIS IS A TRUE AND
ABSENT: ABSTAIN: CORRECT COPY OF AN ACTION TAKEN AND
ENTERED ON THE MINUTES OF THE BOARD
OF SUPERVISORS ON THE DATE SHOWN.
Contact: Kae(ono(925)335-1230
cc: Community Development Department ATTESTED j" I Q '
County Administrator's Office JOHN SWEETEN,CLERK OF THE
Clerk of the Board BOARD OF SUPERVISORS AND
Auditor-Controller COUNTY ADMINISTRATOR
BY: :`1 DEPUTY
Appropriation from Fish and Wildlife Propagation Fund for Annual BBQ
August 10,2004
Page 2 of 2
REASON FOR RECOMMENDATION/BACKGROUND (cont'd)
The first BBQ was hosted in May of 1999. Since then, the Committee has hosted the
event each year in September. The Committee is planning to host the fifth annual BBQ for
all relevant participants in the enforcement process on September 16, 2004. Participants
have indicated that the previous BBQs have been helpful in providing a forum to identify
any opportunities for cooperatively improving the regulatory process to protect fish and
wildlife. Each year a guest speaker is invited to talk about the valuable natural resources in
the County. Last year Carl Wilcox, Environmental Services Manager of the CA Department
of Fish & Game was the guest speaker. This year representatives from the Muir Heritage
Land Trust and Save Mount Diablo are invited to speak.
In the first two years, material donations as well as cash donations from the Fish and Wildlife
Committee members covered the cost of meals. In 2002,the Committee spent approximately
$350 from the Fish and Wildlife Propagation Fund. Last year, the Board authorized to spend
no more than $600 from the Fund to host the event. The Committee spent less than that
amount from the Fund. This year, once again, the Committee unanimously agreed to
recommend that no mor6 than$600.00 from the Fish and Wildlife Propagation Fund be used
to cover any expenses that are not covered through material donations. This expenditure
would be consistent with Fish and Game Code Section 13103 (a), which provides that the
Fish and Wildlife Propagation Fund may be spent on public education relating to the scientific
principles of fish and wildlife conservation.
Should the Board provide its authorization, the Committee intends to hold the event on
Thursday September 16th from 5 to 7 p.m. at former committee member Frank Pereira's
ranch near Alhambra Valley. Invited attendees would include representatives of the California
Department of Fish and Game, Sheriffs Department, District Attorney's Office, Superior
Court, Public Defender's Office, and the East Bay Regional Park District Police. Board of
Supervisor's participation would be most welcome. The event would be an open, public
meeting subject to the Brown Act and Better Government Ordinance, and any interested
individuals would be welcome to attend.
TO: BOARD OF SUPERVISORS = ==°,. Contra
FROM: William J. Pollacek, Treasurer-Tax Collector �,�;, s Costa
DATE: August 10, 2004 °° r�`�oU `� County
IdA
SUBJECT. Audit Report on the County Treasury
SPECIFIC REQUEST(S)OR RECOMMENDATION(S)&BACKGROUND AND JUSTIFICATION
Recommendation:
ACCEPT the audit from the County Auditor-Controller on the activities of the County
Treasurer and the Treasury Oversight Committee as required by Government Code
Section 27134.
ACCEPT the Treasurer's response to the above audit.
FISCAL IMPACT: None
BACKGROUND/REASON (S) FOR RECOMMENDATION (S):
Per Government Code Section 27134 and at the request of the Treasury Oversight
Committee, the County Auditor-Controller audited the County Treasury for the period
January 1 , 2003 through December 31, 2003.
The audit and the County Treasurer's response were reviewed at the Treasury
Oversight Committee meeting of May 18, 2004. The County Treasurer and Treasury
Oversight Committee members agreed with the Auditor-Controller's recommendations
and Treasurer's responses. Copies of the Auditor-Controller's audit and the County
Treasurer's response are submitted to the Board of Supervisors for review and
acceptance.
WJP:mb
Attachment
X YES SIGNATURE:
CONTINUED ON ATTACHMENT:
RECOMMENDATION OF COUNTY ADMINISTRATOR REC MMENDATI OARD COMMITTEE
APPROVE OTHER
SIGNATURES . >
ACTION OF BOA D,SN �,�, APPROVED AS RECOMMENDED
VOTE OF SUPERVISORS I HEREBY CERTIFY THAT THIS IS A TRUE AND CORRECT
COPY OF AN ACTION TAKEN AND ENTERED ON MINUTES OF
THE BOARD OF SUPERVISORS ON THE DATE SHOWN.
UNANIMOUS(ABSENTyr � )
AYES: NOES:
ABSENT: ABSTAIN:
Contact: ,
Cc: Treasurer-Tax Collector's Office ATTESTED 'e
J WEETEN,Z ERK OF THE BOARD OFSUPERVISORS
COUNTY ADMINISTRATOR
BY: f�. e4 !o., Y' t ''"`.• -�" ,DEPUTY
Office of
COUNTY AUDITOR-CONTROLLER,
Contra Cash County
Martinez, California
April 12,2004
TO: Alfred M. Granzella,Chairperson,Treasury Oversight Committee
FROM: Kenneth J. Corcoran,Auditor-Controller
Audit Staff. Joanne M.Bohren, CPA,Auditor II](*
Heine Siewell, Accounting Technician 4,75
SUBJECT. Examination of the Activities of the County Treasurer and the Treasury Oversight
Committee as Required by Government Code Section 27134
EXECUTIVE SUMMARY
We have examined the accounts, records, and procedures of the County Treasurer (Treasurer) and
the records and procedures of the Treasury Oversight Committee (Committee) for the period of
January 1,2003 through December 31,2003.
We conducted the necessary audit tests and procedures to determine if, within our scope, the
following conditions existed:
➢ There was compliance with Government Code Sections 27131 through 27132.4 that govern
the establishment,membership and meetings of the Committee.
➢ There was compliance with Government Code Section 27133 that governs the establishment,
review, and monitoring of investment policy.
➢ The quality of the Treasurer's investment portfolio complied with applicable laws and
administrative requirements governing investments, including Government Code Sections
53601-53607 and 53646 governing authorized investments and the County's Investment
Policy.
➢ Internal controls were adequate to ensure the safeguarding of the financial assets under the
Treasurer's control.
➢ The Treasurer has contracted with financial entities for investment services and safekeeping
and restricted investing transactions to brokers and issuers allowed by the County's
Investment Policy.
S> The Treasurer's Quarterly Investment Reports were accurate.
Alfred M. Granzella, Chairperson, Treasury Oversight Committee April 12, .2004
Examination of the Activities of the County Treasurer and the Treasury Oversight
Committee as Required by Government Code Section 27134 (continued)
Based on the results of our audit tests and procedures, we concluded that, in all material respects,
these conditions existed except for internal controls over Treasurer assets. The Treasurer should
strengthen controls over Treasurer assets as follows:
Maintain sufficient staffing for segregation of duties or establish compensating internal
controls to keep control risk minimized.
In the following section, we provide the full text of this recommendation to help management
address this issue.
We appreciate the excellent cooperation and assistance of the Treasurer staff, especially Clarissa
Javier, Beverly Rellar and Brice Bins during this audit.
2
Alfred M. Granzella, Chairperson, Treasury Oversight Committee April 12, 2004
Examination of the Activities of the County Treasurer and the Treasury Oversight
Committee as Required by Government Code Section 27134 (continued)
RECOMMENDATION
Recommendation: Maintain sufficient staffing for segregation of duties or establish
compensating internal controls to keep control risk minimized.
Condition: 'There was an increase in control risk when absent employees' duties were performed by
available staff, and, consequently, segregation of duties was not always maintained. Personnel who
normally performed the reviewing or reconciling functions were also performing the receiving
function at times, as well.
Criteria: To ensure the safeguarding of the financial assets under the Treasurer's control, the
segregation of certain duties should be maintained. The handling of assets should be separate from
the establishing and maintaining of accountability.
Effect: Without segregation of duties, there is a possibility of undetected errors, omissions and
misappropriation of monies.
Cause: Segregation of duties has historically been difficult due to the regular staff size being small.
Since October 2003, one cashier has been on a catastrophic medical leave, and other employees have
also had personal emergencies and absences in the months since. Consequently,the Treasurer's office .
has been short staffed, sometimes severely, over this time.
Possible solutions: On days when there is a severe staffing shortage, temporary assistance might be
obtained from the Tax Collector's Office. Also, supervisory review of work performed by an
individual who has conflicting duties (see "Criteria") should be performed. If the supervisor is not
available, a second employee should perform the review so that the first employee is not reviewing his
own work.
3
Alfred M. Granzella, Chairperson, Treasury Oversight Committee April 12; 2004 y
Examination of the Activities of the County Treasurer and the Treasury Oversight
Committee as Required by Government Code Section 27134 (continued)
STATUS OF PRIOR.AUDIT RECOMMENDATIONS
There were no audit recommendations from the prior audit.
cc: William J. Pollacek, Treasurer-Tax Collector
4
X0: BOARD OF SUPERVISORS
'. Contra
FROM: Millie Greenberg Costa j
04
DATE: 10 August 2004 County
SUBJECT: Participation in the San Ramon Valley Street Smarts Program
SPECIFIC REQUEST(S)OR RECOMMENDATION(S)&BACKGROUND AND JUSTIFICATION
RECOMMENDATION:
Authorize expenditure of$5,000 from the Dougherty Valley Enhancement Fund to match
contributions by the City of San:Ramon,the Town of Danville, and the San Raman Valley Unified
School District to implement the"Street Smarts" traffic program.
FISCAL IMPACT
To date, the Town of Danville, the City of San Damon, and the San Ramon Valley Unified School
District have made commitments to identify$5,000 in funding to contribute to the launch of the
Program. Additionally,funding commitments totaling$15,000 in private contributions have been
obtained to fund.the Program's efforts. Because almost a third of the children in the San Ramon
Valley live in unincorporated areas, including the Dougherty Valley, the County has been asked
to also contribute$5,000 to the Street Smarts Program.. Because this is a transportation-related
project that will benefit residents of the Dougherty Valley, it would be appropriate to allocate
$5000 from the Dougherty Valley Enhancement Fund for the County's contribution to the project.
The combination of public and private contributions will be sufficient to effectively launch a
valley-wide program that will target a population of over 60,000 people, as well as, its
approximate 10,000 elementary school age children.
Given this multi-organizational effort,which involves funding contributions from numerous
sources, it was recognized that a Program Treasurer was necessary to manage, and report on, the
accounting of this valley-wide effort. Currently,the City of San Ramon Finance staff has agreed
to serve as the Program's Treasurer, pending approval from.the San Ramon City Council.
CONTINUED ON ATTACHMENT: -- YES SIGNATURE:
RECOMMENDATION OF COUNTY ADMINISTRATOR RECOMMENDATION OF BOARD COMMITTEE
APPROVEOTHER
SIGNATURE(S):
. ..
ACTION Of BOARD ON z�° -r,s r X% � i APPROVED AS RECOMMENDED i QTW-E
VOTE OF SUPERVISORS
I HEREBY CERTIFY THAT THIS I$A TRUE
UNANIMOUS {ABSENT r 'Y ti 1 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.
ATTESTED
n Sweeten:CLERK OF THE BOARD OF
'S IPERVISORS AND COUNTY ADMINISTRATOR
BY .: DUTY
Contact Person: Kathy Chlverton
C: CAO
Sup.Greenberg
Maurice Shui
2
BACKGROUND:
After two tragedies in the San Raman Valley in the past year in which three children were killed
in two separate accidents, leaders in the community have searched for a way to make our roads
safer. Research brought us to the City of San Jose where they have developed the "Street Smarts„
program, which is a comprehensive traffic calming education and awareness program. This
program was also used by the Health Services Department in West Contra Costa County. The
City of San Ramon and the Town of Danville are planning to launch a similar program in the San
Raman Valley this fall. They have invited Contra Costa County to join, so that the schools in the
unincorporated areas of the San Ramon Valley may also receive the benefits of the Program.
The County's Public Works Department has long recognized that effective traffic management
requires the Three E'sa Engineering, Enforcement and Education. This program proactively
expands the Education component of a systematic approach to traffic management in the San
Ramon Valley.
W 4
TO: BOARD OF SUPERVISORS ` CONTRA
COSTA
FROM: John Sweeten, County Administrator .,, ' TY
DATE: August 17, 2044C ,d,d
SUBJECT: Disaster Mitigation Act of 2000—Letter of Intent
SPECIFIC REQUEST(S)OR RECOMMENDATION(S) & BACKGROUND AND JUSTIFICATION
RECOMMENDATIONN
APPROVE and AUTHORIZE the Sheriff's Emergency Services Division to join in a multi jurisdictional
planning effort with the Association of Bay Area Governments to develop a local hazard mitigation plan and
submit a Letter of Intent to the State Office of Emergency Services in compliance with the Disaster Mitigation
Act of 2444.
BACKGROUND/REASON(S)_FOR RECOMMENDATION(S):
See attached.
CONTINUED ON ATTACHMENT: -4 S SIGNATURE:
�„ RECOMMENDATION OF COUNTY ADMINISTRATOR—RECOMMEND �� F BOARD COMMITTEE
.z—APPROVE OTHER
s
SIGNATURE(S
ACTION OF B RD N r - _."' APPROVED AS RECOMMENDED�y 4T#
61,
VOTE OF SUPERVISORS
1 HEREBY CERTIFY THAT THIS IS A
UNANIMOUS(ABSENT ` . %':, } TRUE AND CORRECT COPY OF AN
AYES: NOES: ACTION TAKEN AND ENTERED
ABSENT: ABSTAIN: ON MINUTES OF THE BOARD OF
SUPERVISORS,,ON THE DATE SHOWN.
Contact:Scott Tandy,335-1087 '.
ATTESTED
cc: CAO J EETEN,CLERK OF
� ' ........._,
'f BOARD OF SUPERVISORS
-AND COUNTY ADMINISTRATOR
"zy
OFFICE OF THE SHERIFF �' : warren E Rupf
Contra Costa County SHERIFF-CORONER
Emergency Services Division �c�xs Ronald A Jarrell
rti= Dries Ulliiei�heTlff
M
PY28fLincz,California 94553
(925)646-4461
Date: July 15, 2004
To: John Sweeten, County Administrator
Warren E. Rupf, Sheri
From: Dale Varady, Captain
Emergency Services Division
Subject: Hazard Mitigation Plan, Position Paper
Attached is a position paper regarding the development of a hazard mitigation
plan for the County. Emergency Services Division staff prepared the position
paper to assist in deciding what course of action the County should take on this
important issue.
The position paper provides a background of the statutory requirements for the
Disaster Mitigation Act of 2000 (DMA2030301). Also, various mitigation plan options
are discussed and a recommendation is offered.
Regardless of the course of action Contra Costa County decides to take, we
must complete the attached Letter of Intent and forward it to the State Office of
Emergency Services, Mitigation Section. Once a decision has been made, my
staff will assist in the preparation of the letter of intent.
Should you require more information or wish to discuss our recommendation
please call me.
QV:dbv
Hazard Mitigation Plan
Position Paper -July 2004
Ever since the Federal passage of the Disaster Mitigation Act of 2000 (DMA 2000) there
has been a great deal of debate about what impact the law will have on FEMA's
distribution of post-disaster recovery and mitigation funds to communities. With the
disaster/hazard planning specified by DMA 2000 being extensive, labor-intensive, and
the perceived rewards so small, many jurisdictions in California have debated whether
they should undertake the task at all.
Contra Costa County needs to resolve this debate for itself and decide whether to
commit to creating a county mitigation plan that can be approved by the State and
FEMA within the deadline of November 1, 2004. Before we can do this, we need to
know what the requirements, directives and ramification of this decision might be. This
paper will explore these issues as they apply to Contra Costa County.
Background
Emergency management professionals have long traded stories about "repetitive loss"
properties (land or structures that flood or burn or slide year after year). Structures in
flood plains are especially vulnerable to repetitive losses. There are documented cases
of houses situated in a flood plain that carry not only the original mortgage, but also
three or four Small Business Administration (SBA) loans which is the standard vehicle
for delivery of repair money after a disaster.
The standard response to this state of affairs is mitigation. Mitigation is defined as "any
sustained action taken to reduce or eliminate the long-term risk to human life and
property from hazards." Mitigation can take many forms: zoning regulations, building
code modification and enforcement, seismic retrofitting, flood control projects, and
buying out disaster-prone properties are all common approaches. The general idea
behind mitigation is that the projects cost less than the losses they prevent and may
lessen the possibility of death or injury.
For at least twenty years, the Hazard Mitigation Grant Program (HMGP) has been a
standard part of the FEMA disaster recovery regime, but the HMGP did not eliminate
the repetitive loss problem. Also, some jurisdictions that might have benefited from
HMGP and associated programs failed to use the money well because they had never
planned for disaster mitigation.
In response to this perceived problem, Congress passed the Disaster Mitigation Act of
2000, Public Law 106-390, which President Clinton signed into law on October 30,
2000. The implementing regulations were completed in late 2002. DMA 2000 made a
number of changes to the Robert T. Stafford Disaster Relief and Emergency Assistance
Act, Public Law 93-288 (the Stafford Act) and to the part of the Code of Federal
Regulations (CFR) that govern disaster assistance.
Provisions of DMA 2000
DMA 2000's intent is to force state and local governments to plan and execute
mitigation projects before a disaster hits. While there are other facets of DMA2000 of
interest the two major provisions are mitigation planning and pre-disaster mitigation
grants.
As of November 1, 2004, all states are expected to have a FEMA-approved Standard
State Mitigation Plan. Lacking such a plan, a state becomes ineligible for Public
Assistance (PA) permanent restoration funds for public facilities, Fire Management
Assistance Grants (FMAG) and HMGP money.
A new program that began as a result of DMA 2000 is the Pre-Disaster Mitigation Grant
(PDM). This program is meant to fund mitigation planning and projects in advance of
disasters. It replaces Project Impact, which in turn had replaced several smaller
hazard-specific programs geared toward earthquakes, hurricanes and so on. Projects
proposed across the nation must compete for funding under this program. A state must
have an approved Mitigation Plan in hand in order to qualify for PDM funding.
Local governments are required to produce FEMA-approved mitigation plans in order to
qualify for HMGP funding and for PDM funding. Local plans are much the same in
format as that expected of the standard state mitigation plans and need to be
resubmitted every five year. Multi-jurisdictional plans may be accepted as long as all
involved jurisdictions formally approve them.
The new planning requirements do not appear to have affected the terms of the Flood
Mitigation Assistance program. The regulations for this program still refer to the need
for a "flood mitigation plan", although State OES claims this can be satisfied by a flood
specific section in the local mitigation plan.
Practical Consequences for Contra Costa
It is clear that Congress intends to have states and localities prepare mitigation pians.
This is not in itself, objectionable. However, the scope of the project and the time that
will be required, especially in the light of the "public participation" ingredient, make it a
substantial investment for this county. The "official" deadline is well in sight, but what
are the ramifications of not preparing a local mitigation plan?
A lot has been rumored, including a complete cutoff of Federal disaster assistance. As
the amended Stafford Act and the applicable CFR sections are written, this is clearly not
the case. Following is a summary of the types of Federal disaster assistance that will
2
explicitly not be affected by the presence or absence of a state or local hazard
mitigation plan.
General Federal assistance
Essential assistance
Debris removal
Assistance to individuals & households
Unemployment assistance
Food coupons & distribution
Food commodities
Legal services
Crisis counseling assistance and training
Community disaster loans
Federal emergency assistance
As previously mentioned, if a state fails to accomplish a FEMA-approved Standard
State Mitigation Plan, it (and its constituent localities) will be ineligible for Public
Assistance permanent restoration funds, HMGP, PDM and FMAG. However, California
intends to have an approved plan in place by November 2004, so the State should
retain its eligibility for all of these programs. A draft of their plan was released for public
comment July 1, 2004.
As this County does not at present maintain a Flood Mitigation Plan, it is not eligible for
funding under the Flood Mitigation Assistance program. If the local mitigation plan
includes a flood-specific section, the County would become eligible for this aid.
However, the entire Flood Mitigation Assistance program is funded for only $20 million
in FY04. It is unlikely we would be able to obtain any significant amount of money from
this source.
It appears that the only two major programs from which this county would be excluded
through lack of a local mitigation plan would be PDM and HMGP.
Of these two, the PDM program is perhaps the least of a loss to us. The FY03 PDM
project grants amounted to $131.5 million (nationwide) and roughly $150 million in
FY04, with an additional $250,000 per state for planning. However, there is a restriction
on the projects to be funded:
"For FY 2003, FEMA has established a National priority to fund
mitigation projects that address the National Flood Insurance
Program (NFIP) repetitive flood loss properties. More specifically,
the emphasis is on addressing repetitive flood loss properties
identified in the pilot NFIP Repetitive Loss Properties List.,,
Contra Costa County has at least eight repetitive-loss properties on the list mentioned
above. Many counties in this state (i.e. Sonoma) and others have hundreds or perhaps
thousands of these properties. It is unlikely that any projects we might propose would
3
be selected for funding in this round. Projects mitigating the effects of other types of
hazards (earthquake, wildfire, etc.) are clearly not on the agenda. The PDM planning
money allocated to the State was obligated long ago. In light of recent events in the
Delta, however, it may improve this county's chances of getting PDM funds in the future.
Additional research will be done for a specific recommendation on this possibility.
The HMPG might be another matter. The HMGP money could add up to a tidy sum
after a major disaster, just when extra cash is needed most. Without an approved local
mitigation plan, we would not be eligible for HMGP funding after a disaster.
How much of a loss is this? It depends on the scope of the disaster.
Research
Emergency Planners from the Sheriff's Office of Emergency Services attended Hazard
Mitigation Plan development classes put on by the State OES Disaster Assistance
Division.
Staff members performed an extensive review of DMA 2000 requirements and have
reviewed available options and the financial impact of those options. This included
meeting with a consultant that assisted in writing the FEMA guidelines for DMA 2000
along with the Community Development Director and Flood Plain Manager from Public
Works
Research indicates that, according to FEMA Region IX, there is no record of a
community in Contra Costa County, or the county itself ever applying for competitive
pre-disaster grant funds. It also indicates that the over all amount of money available
across the nation for pre-disaster mitigation is minimal.
Contra Costa has benefited from HMGP funds following the Loma Prieta and Northridge
Earthquakes and floods of 1995, `97 and '98 totaling approximately $4.5 million.
According to representatives from FEMA Region IX, if a local jurisdiction does
not have an approved Hazard Mitigation plan in place when a disaster strikes, that
jurisdiction will have one year from the day of the disaster to complete a Hazard
Mitigation plan. This can be done without ramifications of not having one prior to
the disaster.
Research also indicates that the only HMPG funding actually effected by not having a
plan are the actual mitigation dollars. The dollars for planning the mitigation effort would
still be available.
The planning effort can be quite costly both in actual dollars and staff time. It is
estimated that it would take two full time employees (1 GIS Analyst and 1 Sr.
Emergency Planner) 6 months to complete the plan.
4
Yolo County is paying $100,000 to a consulting company and pro rating the cost to the
cities within the county. San Diego County is using two full time employees from staff
and two part time employees from a consulting company. Sacramento County is paying
approximately$100,000 for two full time employees from a consulting firm. In all of
these cases, whether the effort is being lead by a consulting company or not, a
significant amount of staff time from the jurisdictions is still required.
The Association of Bay Area Government (ABAG) has received a $450,000 FEMA grant
to develop a bay area multi jurisdictional hazard mitigation pian. FEMA IX has indicated
that if a community/agency participates in the ABAG process then the ABAG HMP will
meet the requirements of DMA 2000. The "community/agency participation" remains
unclear. ABAG has been unable to provide an updated project plan or timeline and has
been unable to qualify how much time or what resources they will require from a
participating agency. While this is not totally clear it is certain that the costs associated
(soft and hard) will be significantly less than taking on the project on our own.
Alameda, Santa Clara and Marin counties have opted to use ABAG for their DMA
2000 requirements. Other counties are considering the possibility. Whether a county
chooses to go with the ABAG project or not, cities and special districts within the county
can make an independent decision one way or the other.
Contra Costa could benefit from the development of a local hazard mitigation plan. The
question at issue is when and how does it need to do sot
By delaying the completion of a plan we do "risk" having an event and "potentially„ the
loss of mitigation dollars. On the other hand, developing a local mitigation plan will be a
lengthy and challenging process, involving multiple County departments, various cities,
and likely a vocal, if not numerous portion of the public. In addition to OES, the
following County departments make up the likely set required to complete the plan:
Assessor, Auditor/Controller, Building Inspection, Community Development, General
Services, Health Services, Library and Public Works.
Options
1. Do not develop a plan.
2. Do not develop a pian now. Wait for a disaster and do a plan retroactively.
3. Prioritize the need for the plan and get to it later this year or next.
4. Join the ABAG initiative.
5
Recommendation
With all the research that has been done it is the recommendation of the Office of
Emergency Services that the County join in the multi-jurisdictional planning effort of
ABAG. The hard cost of this option is virtually non existent. The soft cost would be
spread between different departments and primarily involve research and attendance at
community meetings which would be lead by ABAG. While we can not give an exact
amount of time involved, thus making it impossible to give a firm dollar amount, it is our
belief that the cost benefit of this option far outweighs any of the other options available
to us. In this day of decreased staff, increased responsibilities and decreasing budgets
being able to gain an approved Hazard Mitigation Pian with minimal staff hours involved
and no hard costs is the most effective and efficient option possible.
6
Letter of Intent
(to develop a Local Hazard Mitigation Plan)
County of , California
] The County does not intend to develop a Local Hazard Mitigation
Plan (LHMP), at this time. [The County understands that it will not be
eligible to receive mitigation project funding after November 1, 2004.]
] The County intends to develop and submit for State review and
FEMA approval, a [ ] Single Jurisdiction or [ ] Multi-
Jurisdictional Local Hazard Mitigation Flan, AND:
[ ] The County has begun development of a LHMP.
[ ] The County will begin development of a LOV by
Date:
(If Multi-Jurisdictional; Name of LEAD Jurisdiction: )
] The County does not have enough information to complete this Letter of
Intent. Please contact the person listed below to provide clarifications or
additional information to the County.
Signed: Date:
(Board Chair or Designated Representative)
(Print name& title of signing official)
(please provide the name of the County's contact person in the box below.)
Name LHMP Contact Person:
Title:
Telephone
E-mail address:
Please complete the enclosed Letter of Intent by ASAI'.
FAX to the OES Hazard Mitigation Section at (916) 845-8385 or 845-8386.
TO: BOARD OF SUPERVISORS ,;' Contra
FROM: SUPERVISOR GAYLE B. UILKEMA
Costa
DATE: JULY 29, 2004 County
ill V
SUBJECT: 2003 ANNUAL REPORT FROM THE f
CROCKETT/CARQUINEZ FIRE PROTECTION COMMISSIONERS
SPECIFIC REQUEST(S)OR RECOMMENDATION(S)&BACKGROUND AND JUSTIFICATION
RECOMMENDATIONS:
1. RECEIVE 2003 Annual Report submitted by the Crockett/Carquinez Fire Protection
Commissioners.
2. REFER to the County Administrator and Human Resources Director for study the
Commissioner's recommendation to consider a pay increase for volunteer firefighters
of the Crocket/Carquinez Fire Protection District, and REPORT back to the Beard of
Supervisors within 90 days with recommendations, if any.
CONTINUED ON ATTACHMENT: SIGNATURE:
❑ RECOMMENDATION OF COUNTY ADMINISTRATOR ❑ RECOMMENDATION OF BOARD COMMITTEE
❑APPROVE ❑ OTHER ;
SIGNATURE(S):
ACTION OF BOARD ON
APPROVED AS RECOMMENDED ❑ OTHER ❑
VOTE OF SUPERVISORS: I HEREBY CERTIFY THAT THIS IS A TRUE AND
CORRECT COPY OF AN ACTION TAKEN AND
UNANIMOUS(ABSENT_ � -�° ) ENTERED ON THE MINUTES OF THE BOARD OF
AYES: NOES: SUPERVISORS ON THE DATE SHOWN.
ABSENT: ABSTAIN: ATTESTED: AUGUST 10,2004
Contact: Supervisor Gayle B. Uilkema(925)335-1046 JOHN SWEETEN,CLERK OF THE BOARD OF
SUPERVISORS AND COUNTY ADMINISTRATOR
cc: COUNTY ADMINISTRATOR(TANDYISEITHEL)
HUMAN RESOURCES DIRECTOR
By: - ; =Deputy
BACKGROUND:
On June 18, 2002, the Board of Supervisors adopted Resolution No. 2002/377, which requires
that each regular and ongoing board, commission, or committee shall annually report to the
Board of Supervisors on its activities, accomplishments, membership attendance, required
training/certification (if any), and proposed work plan or objectives for the following year, on the
second Tuesday in December.
Annual reports shall follow the following format and shall not exceed two typewritten
pages:
Advisory Body Name:
Advisory Body Meeting Time/Location:
Chair(during the reporting period):
Staffperson (during the reporting period):
Reporting Period:
1. Activities (1/2 page)
H. Accomplishments (1/2 page)
Ill. Attendance/Representation (1/4 page)
IV. Training/Certification (1/4 page)
V. Proposed Work Plan/Objectives for Next Year (1/2 page)
I received the attached report from the Crockett/Carquinez Fire District Commissioners on
June 21, 2004. The Work Plan and 2004 Objectives Section of the report contains a
recommendation that the Board of Supervisors consider an increase in the pay structure for
volunteer firefighters of the Crocket/Carquinez Fire Protection District. As the pay structure
has not been adjusted for several years, I am recommending that the County Administrator be
directed to analyze the pay rates for these volunteer firefighters and return to the Board within
90 days with any recommendations they may have for'adjustment.
Honorable Gayle Ullkema June 17, 200+4
Supervisor, District 2
Dear Gayle,
This cover letter will serve to present the 2003 Annual Report
from the Advisory Commission of the Crockett/Carquinez Fire
Protection District. The report will bear similarities to the 2002
Annual Report because the responsibilities of the Advisory
Commission remain consistent on a year-to-year basis.
There Is an additional point In this yew's report that we wish to bring to
your attention for special consideration. In the section MNork Plan and
Objectives for Year 2004' we have proposed a pay rate increase for the
active duty performance of the district firefighters. We are well aware of the
current financial status of the County Administration, but would still
respectfully request that you give whatever consideration Is available to your
office to this request.
The following signatures will attest to the support of the
Crockett/Carquinez Fire District Advisory Commission for your
favorable consideration of the request.
Don tnson, Commission Chair 2004 Frank Ochinero, Commissioner
Fred Marla,_Commissioner Henry,Trigila, Commissioner
ane (Bud) Burilson, Commissioner Michael White, Alt. Co missioner
01>
Gerald Littleton, District Chief
i
N
CROCKETT I CARQUINEZ FIRE PROTECTION DISTRICT
ANNUAL REPORT FOR YEAR 2003
NAME-CROCKETTICARQUINEZ FIRE PROTECTION DISTRICT
ADVISORY COMMITTEE
MEETING TIME AND PLACE.7:00 P.M.ON THE THIRD THURSDAY OF EACH MONTH AT FIRE
STATION#78,746 LORING AVE.CROCKETT.CA 94929.REQUIRED PUBLIC NOTICE IS
POSTED AT THE POMONA STREET PUBLIC BULLETIN BOARD.
♦ ELECTED CHAIRPERSON FOR YEAR 2003 WAS COMMISSIONER FRANK OCHINERO.
♦ THE ELECTED STAFF PERSON FOR YEAR 2003 WAS COMMISSIONER BUD SURLISON.
ACTIVITIES- FOR THE REPORTING YEAR 2003 THE ADVISORY COMMISSION CONTINUED
TO WORK IN CONJUNCTION WITH THIS CHIEF OF THE DISTRICT,CHIEF HERALD LITTLETON,
AS AN OVERSIGHT HOARD FOR DISTRICT FINANCIAL EXPENDITURES,DISTRICT
OPERATIONS,MAINTENANCE AND CONSTRUCTION OF THE DISTRICT PHYSICAL CAMPUS
AND FACILITIES AND PREVENTATIVE MAINTENANCE FOR DISTRICT EQUIPMENT.
♦ THE ADVISORY COMMISSION CONTINUES TO ACT AS A CITIZEN REVIEW BOARD FOR
COMMUNITY FIRE HAZARD ABATEMENT ISSUES AND COMMUNITY FIRE PROTECTION
ISSUES.ALTHOUGH THE HOUSING PROJECT WAS COMPLETED IN 2003,THE COMMISSION
CONTINUED TO ASSIST THE NEIGHBORING EAST BAY HABITAT FOR HUMANITY PROJECT
BY MAKING AVAILABLE THE UPSTAIRS TRAINING FACILITIES AT 746 LORING AVENUE FOR
THEIR MONTHLY MEETING USE.
r ACCOMPLISHMENTS-FOR THE REPORTING YEAR 2003 THE ADVISORY COMMISSION HAS
ACCOMPLISHED THE ONGOING OVERSIGHT AND DOCUMENTATION OF THE SEISMIC
RETROFIT CONSTRUCTION WORK BEING PERFORMED AT FIRE STATION#79 AT 1438
FLORA ST.IN CROCKETT.THE CONSTRUCTION DOCUMENTATION PERFORMED BY THE
COMMISSION INCLUDES PROJECT MEETINGS WITH COUNTY REPRESENTATIVES ON THE
PROJECT FOR THE YEAR 2003.THE COMMISSION SUPPORTED THE MORALE AND FUND
RAISING ACTIVITIES OF THE CROCKETT i CARQUINEZ FIREFIGHTERS ASSOCIATION AND
CONTRIBUTED FUNDS FOR THE DISTRICT FIREFIGHTERS TRAINING FUND.
♦ ATTENDANCEIREPRESENTATION-THE CROCKETT CARQUINEZ FIRE PROTECTION
DISTRICT IS REPRESENTED BY THE FOLLOWING APPOINTED COMMISSIONERS;
APPOINTEE 1 ---TERM EXPIRES 1213112006
MR. DUANE(BUD)BURL130N-364 EDWARDS ST.CROCKETT CA,94525
APPOINTEE 2----TERM EXPIRES 12/3112006
MR.DON ROBINSON-19 S AVE.(P.O.BOX 6)PORT COSTA CA,94,569
APPOINTEE 3---TERM EXPIRES 12/3112006
MR.FRANK OCHINERO-1315 ROSE ST.CROCKETT CA,94525
APPOINTEE 4--TERM EXPIRES 12/3112006
MR.HANK TRIGLIA 1$35 POMONA ST.CROCKETT CA,94825
APPOINTEE 5-TERM EXPIRES 12/31/2006
MR. FRED MARIA-----$05 EDWARDS ST.CROCKETT CA,94929
ALTERNATE COMMISSIONER MIKE WHITE-APPOINTED 2003
PAGE i
4
a ATTENDANCE AT SCHEDULED MEETINGS IS REGULAR AND NO UNEXPECTED LACK OF
QUORUM HAS RESULTED IN CANCELLED MEETINGS.THE COMMISSION HAS EXPERIENCED
NO PUBLIC INPUT DURING THE MEETINGS FOR THIS REPORTING YEAR.THE STAFF
MEMBER OF THE ADVISORY COUNSEL HAS REPRESENTED AND REPORTED FOR THE
COMMISSION AT LOCAL COMMUNITY CHAMBER OF COMMERCE ACTIVITIES.COMMISSION
MEMBERS HAVE ATTENDED MEETINGS OF THE CROCKETT COMMUNITY FOUNDATION TO
SUPPORT DISTRICT GRANT REQUESTS AND AS REPRESENTATIVES OF THE COMMUNITY.
♦ TRAINING I CERTIFICATION-THE MAJORITY OF THE MEMBERS OF THE ADVISORY
COMMISSION HAVE PAST EXPERIENCE IN FIRE SUPPRESSION AND PREVENTION AND WERE
CERTIFIED AS FIREFIGHTERS.THERE ARE RETIRED OFFICERS OF OTHER FIRE AGENCIES
AS MEMBERS OF THE COMMISSION.THERE ARE ALSO RETIRED PUBLIC UTILITY
SUPERVISORS AND MUNICIPAL GOVERNMENT PUBLIC WORKS MANAGERS AS MEMBERS OF
THE COMMISSION,DEMONSTRATING A WIDE ARRAY OF EXPERIENCE FOR THE BENEFIT OF
THE DISTRICT.THERE IS ALSO A COMMISSION MEMBER CERTIFIED BY THE CALIFORNIA
SPECIALIZED TRAINING INSTITUTE AS AN EMERGENCY OPERATIONS CENTER(COC)
OPERATIONS MANAGER FOR EARTHQUAKE AND FLOOD EMERGENCIES.
s WORK PLAN I OBJECTIVES FOR YEAR 2004-CONTINUE ADVISORY COMMISSION
OVERSIGHT PROGRAM FOR THE DISTRICT FINANCIAL AND OPERATIONAL ACTIVITIES WITH
REGULAR MEETINGS AND CONFERENCES WITH THE DISTRICT CHIEF AND OTHER DISTRICT
OFFICERS.WITH THIS OVERSIGHT RESPONSIBILITY IN VIEW,THE ADVISORY COMMISSION
WOULD RESPECTFULLY REQUEST THE DISTRICT 2 SUPERVISOR TO CONSIDER AN
INCREASE IN THE PAY STRUCTURE FOR THE VOLUNTEER FIREFIGHTERS OF THE
CRGCKEWICARQINEZ FIRE DISTRICT.THESE DEDICATED VOLUNTEERS HAVE REMAINED AT
THE SAME LEVEL OF PAYMENT FOR ACTIVE DUTY($9.001HOUR)FOR A SIGNIFICANT
NUMBER OF YEARS.THE CURRENT LEVEL OF PAYMENT SEEMS OUT OF STEP WITH THE
CURRENT ECONOMY AND DOESN'T REFLECT THE HIGH LEVEL OF TRAINING AND
DEDICATION DEMONSTRATED BY THESE VOLUNTEER FIREFIGHTERS.
♦ CONTINUE TO MONITOR AND DOCUMENT CONSTRUCTION ACTIVITIES FOR THE SEISMIC
RETROFIT OF FIRE STATION#79.ASSIST WITH ANY REQUESTED PARTICIPATION IN POST
CONSTRUCTION MATTERS PERTAINING TO THE STATION 79 RETROFIT PROJECT.CONFER
WITH DISTRICT OFFICERS TO DETERMINE FEASIBILITY OF TRAINING MEMBERS OF THE
ADVISORY COMMISSION FOR LOCAL NEIGHBORHOOD EMERGENCY RESPONSE ACTIVITIES
FOR LOCAL EARTHQUAKE EMERGENCIES.CONTINUE TO ASSIST THE DISTRICT
FIREFIGHTERS ASSOCIATION IN THEIR FUND RAISING ACTIVITIES AND EVENTS AND
CONTINUE TO PROVIDE OVERSIGHT AND ASSISTANCE TO THE DISTRICT ADMINISTRATION
WHEN REQUESTING GRANT FUNDING FROM THE CROCKETT COMMUNITY FOUNDATION AND
OTHER GRANTING AGENCIES.
PAGE 2