HomeMy WebLinkAboutMINUTES - 11291988 - FC.2 To' �- BOARD OF SUPERVISORS
FROM: Finance Committee Cwtra
Supervisor Nancy Fanden Cx)sta
Supervisor Tom Powers
DATE' CO^
November 29, 1988
SUBJECT:
FIRE DISTRICT SPECIAL DISTRICT AUGMENTATION FUND
CAPITAL ALLOCATION APPORTIONMENT REVIEW
SPECIFIC REQUEST(S) OR RECOMMENDATION(S) & BACKGROUND AM JUSTIFICATION
RECOMMENDATION:
Continue the current Special District Augmentation Fund (SDAF) allocation
policy which allows for an allocation for capital expenditures of up to
12. 50 of the fire districts ' share of the Fund.
FINANCIAL IMPACT:
Approval of the recommendation will, subject to the discretion of the
Board of Supervisors, allow for the maximum allocation for capital
expenditures as provided in the agreement between the Board and the
United Professional Firefighters Local 1230.,
BACKGROUND/REASONS FOR RECOMMENDATION:
On October 11, 1988, the Board of Supervisors requested the . Finance
Committee to review a proposed adjustment in the fire districts , SDAF
allocation Percentages which would designate 2 . 5% of the 12. 5% capital
funds for special needs.
Attached is a letter from Chief William Maxfield on behalf of the
Contra Costa County Fire Chiefs' Association recommending that the
current fire district SDAF allocation percentages be maintained. The
recommendation of the Association is based on the view that the
present allocation method provides for the greatest flexibility in
allocating augmentation funds to meet the needs of the districts.
The County Administrator' s Office and this Committee support the
recommendation of the County Fire Chiefs' Association. The current
allocation policy provides the flexibility to either allocate the entire
12. 5% to fund the annual capital improvement recommendations of the County
Fire Chiefs' Association capital Improvements Committee or to divert a
portion of the amount for other special purposes as determined by. the Board
of Supervisors.
CONTINUED ON ATTACHMENT: YES SIGNATURE:
RECOMMENDATION OF COUNTY ADMINISTRATOR RECOMMENDATION OF BOARD M I TTEE:
APPROVE, OTHrc4R
I rViSor TOM
A07� . Powers SIGNATURE(Sl* Super or Nancy Fanden Sp rvisor Tom Powers
ACTION OF BOARD ON NbAvember 29 , 1988 APPROVED AS RECOMMENDED X OTHER
(The Clerk was requested to list this matter on the December 6, 1988 Board agenda
for reconsideration.)
VOTE OF SUPERVISORS
I HEREBY CERTIFY THAT THIS IS A TRUE
UNANIMOUS (ABSENT AND CORRECT COPY OF AN ACTION TAKEN
AYES'. I, II, III, V NOES' IV AND ENTERED ON THE MINUTES OF THE BOARD
ABSENT: ABSTAIN* OF SUPERVISORS ON THE DATE I SHOWN.
cc: County Administrator ATTESTED
County Counsel PHIL BATCHELOR, CLERK OF THE BOARD OF
Auditor-Controller SUPERVISORS AND COUNTY ADMINISTRATOR
County Fire Districts
Independent Fire Districts
United Professional Firefighters BY DEPUTY
M382/7-83 Local 1230
J
The effectiveness of this flexibility has been demonstrated in the last two
fiscal years ( 1987-1988 and 1988-1989) . In 1987-1988, the Board of
Supervisors designated 2. 5% of the capital funds to be used for purposes
other than capital expenditures recommended by the Capital Improvements
Committee. Of the amount set aside for special purposes, $400,000 was
approved for the acquisition of a fire station site for Contra Costa County
Fire Protection District. In the current fiscal year, the Board allocated
$500,000 to Contra Costa County Fire Protection District for fire station
construction and $400,000 to Riverview Fire for fire station site
acquisitions.
Since the Capital Improvements Committee was aware of the prior
financial commitments for special needs in the above two fiscal years,
its recommendations were structured to deal with the net amount of
money available for funding traditional capital needs. In future
years, the recommendations of the Capital Improvements Committee will
be based on the amount of funds available after allowing for any
special need projects approved by the Board. In years in which there
are no known special needs projects, the Capital Improvements
Committee would recommend allocating the entire 12. 5% for routine
capital needs. If special needs are identified by the Board after the
Capital Improvements Committee makes its recommendations, the funding
proposal could easily be scaled down to allow for the special needs
because the recommendations of the Capital Improvements Committee are
in priority order.
If 2. 5% of the capital funds is designated for special needs on an
ongoing basis, that portion of the Augmentation Fund would not be
available for routine capital expenditures in years when no special
needs are identified. In such cases, the Board of Supervisors would
have to take specific action to authorize the 2. 5% to be used for
routine capital expenditures. The Capital Improvements Committee
would have to reconvene to develop recommendations for spending the
additional portion of the capital allocation. Situations of this kind
would add unnecessary steps to the review and allocation process for
the Board of Supervisors and the Capital Improvements Committee.