HomeMy WebLinkAboutMINUTES - 07131993 - 2.A To: BOARD OF SUPERVISORS Contra
r
FROM: Phil Batchelor, County Administrator COSta
obi 'S
County
July 13, 1993
DATE: a cooN�
SUBJECT: Plan for Expenditure Reductions/Functional Integration of
Fire Districts and Funding for 1993-1994
SPECIFIC REQUEST(S)OR RECOMMENDATION(S)&BACKGROUND AND JUSTIFICATION
RECOMMENDATIONS:
1 . Acknowledge that since the Preliminary Plan was released on
June 10, 1993, it has been circulated for public comment for
over 30 days .
2 . Acknowledge the following specific efforts regarding the
distribution of the Plan:
* Copies to Local 1230, Taxpayers and Fire Advisory
Commissions .
* Copies to Chambers of Commerce, Industrial Associations
and the Contra Costa Council.
* Copies to Mayors and Councils of the 18 cities in Contra
Costa County.
* Presentation by Supervisor Jeff Smith at the July Mayor's
Conference meeting.
3 . Acknowledge the letters from the Cities of E1 Cerrito,
Lafayette and Concord and direct Staff to meet with those
cities to discuss specific concerns and clarify the need for
and intention of the County regarding the expenditure
reduction plan.
4 . Consider Public comments from interested parties regarding the
Functional Integration/Budget Reduction Plan.
5 . Direct County Administrator and Fire Chief to continue
pursuing the budget reductions outlined in the Plan.
CONTINUED ON ATTACHMENT: x YES SIGNATURE:
RECOMMENDATION OF COUNTY ADMINISTRATOR RECOMMENDATION OF BOARD COMMITTEE /
APPROVE OTHER
SIGNATURE(S): y
ACTION OF BOARD ON !3 / 9 93 APPROVED AS RECOMMENDED OTHER 1i-
APPROVED the above recommendations of the County Administrator, with
Recommendation No. 7 amended to include instructions to the County Administrator to
develop the Plan within a short period of time; and adding Recommendation No. 11 to
request the County. Administrator to explore the costs and benefits of different
organizational options in Moraga with a report to the Board on August 3, 1993, to
include an update on the State Budget impacts and feasibility to proceeding with
the Moraga Fire Protection District being an independent district; and REQUESTING
the County Administrator to report to the Board on July 27, 1993 on organizational
issues related thereto.
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.
ATTESTED `j
Contact: PHIL BAT��/IELOR, LERK OF THE BOARD OF
-I
cc: County Administrator SUPER ORS AND COUNTY ADMINISTRATOR
County Counsel
BY DEPUTY
J;uly 13, 1993
Plan for Expenditure Reductions/Functional Integration of
Fire Districts and Funding for 1993-1994
Page -2-
6 . Defer final action on the recommended functional integration
of the fire districts until the complete and final impacts of
the State budget and trailer bills are known.
7 . Direct the County Administrator to develop a process to
explore the feasibility of consolidating the five merit system
districts and the Pinole Fire District into a single fire
district and consolidating the three East County volunteer
districts into a single volunteer district.
8 . Defer action on the desirability of including the Oakley Fire
District in the East Diablo/Bethel Island Functional
Integration Plan.
9 . Create a Community Task Force in Lafayette and Orinda area to
review all aspects of the potential combination of Station 16
(Contra Costa County) and Station 43 (Orinda) prior to any
final decision.
10 . Approve fire district management cost allocation plan for
fiscal year 1992-1993 on the basis of the district budgets .
REASONS FOR RECOMMENDATIONS:
Recommendations Nos . 1-4 (Plan circulation and public comment. )
On June 15, 1993 the Board of Supervisors received the preliminary
plan from the County Administrator and scheduled June 22, 1993 for
consideration.
One June 22, 1993 the Board received limited public comments,
discussed the Plan and deferred action until July 13, 1993 to
provide adequate time for all interested parties to review the Plan
and to assure the widest possible circulation of the Plan for input
and feedback.
Written comments have been received from three Mayors, E1 Cerrito,
Lafayette and Concord. (See attached letters . )
o E1 Cerrito, which has responsibility for operating a fire
department, remains committed to the cooperative
relationship with the County-governed West County
District and requests that the implications of reducing
staffing be thoroughly reviewed with the other fire
service providers in West County.
o Lafayette, even though it does not have responsibility
for fire protection, urges that Station 16 be kept open
while working with the County on mutually beneficial
solutions .
o Concord, even though it does not have responsibility for
fire service, urges that action be delayed on
implementing expenditure reductions until the State
budget is adopted and to engage interested communities
and parties in dialogue on the proposal .
We suggest that staff offer to attend meetings of the three City
Councils to discuss their concerns and clarify the County' s intent
to preserve our fire service by maintaining current fire fighting
staff, keeping stations open and maintaining a balanced budget. We
would welcome any constructive ideas on how to achieve the goal of
a 10% cost reduction outlined in the preliminary plan.
Recommendation No. 5 (Expenditure Reductions . )
On June 29, 1993 the State budget and implementing legislation were
signed by the Governor. This includes the elimination of the
Special District Augmentation Fund.
Although the purported objective of the budget legislation is to
provide continued funding for fire districts, preliminary analysis
reveals the application of the legislation in Contra Costa County
may result in substantial reductions for many fire districts .
July 13, 1993
Plan for Expenditure Reductions/Functional Integration of
Fire Districts and Funding for 1993-1994
Page -3-
This is a preliminary conclusion based on an initial review of the
legislation by the County Administrator' s Office. The actual
impact of the State budget will not be known until guidelines are
formulated in August by a committee of county Auditors and Chaired
by the State Controller. Additionally, there are efforts underway
to amend the budget legislation to protect funding of fire
districts .
Notwithstanding the impact of the State budget and any clarifying
guidelines expenditure reductions in the range of 10% are still
required for County governed fire districts because the failure of
the benefit assessment elections left a gap in funding for FY 1993-
94 .
Recommendation No. 6 (Functional Integration. )
Many of the elements of the Plan were based on the relative 1992-
1993 funding levels and financial flexibility afforded by the
Special District Augmentation Fund.
In view of the uncertainties and the apparent unintended result of
the State budget actions, it is appropriate to continue the
existing shared administrative structure and defer further
implementation of the functional integration plan until all the
impacts of the budget legislation are known or clarified.
Recommendation No. 7 (Exploring Consolidation. )
Depending on the effects of the final State budget actions it may
become a necessity to formally consolidate the five merit system
districts (Contra Costa County, Moraga, Orinda, Riverview and West
County) and the Pinole Fire District into one paid fire district.
The consolidation of the three volunteer fire districts (Bethel
Island, East Diablo and Oakley) into one volunteer district should
also be considered.
This is due to the apparent fiscal disparities caused by State
budget legislation and the attendant loss of local flexibility in
allocating financial resounds .
Revisiting consolidation should be done with a commitment to
maintain and protect unique services, special taxes or local
donations within existing districts - such as Moraga' s fire flow
tax and para medic service.
Recommendation No. 8 (Oakley Fire District. )
Until fire district funding issues are stabilized, the feasibility
of including Oakley Fire in the volunteer functional integration
plan cannot be determined.
Recommendation No. 9 (Feasibility of Combining Stations . )
The June 15, 1993 report included recommendations to order a study
of the feasibility of combining Station 16 and Station 43 into a
new centrally located station. If the Board approves this
recommendation, a Community Task Force should be created to review
the pros and cons prior to any decision on the potential
combination. The task force should consist of members from the
following:
* Orinda Fire Advisory Commission
* Contra Costa Fire Advisory Commission
* Happy Valley Homeowners Association
* City of Lafayette
* City of Orinda
* An Orinda Homeowners or Taxpayers Group
* Local 1230
Recommendation No. 10 (Allocation of Management Costs)
The establishment of the integrated management structure of the
five merit system districts on March 30, 1993 requires a method to
allocate the costs of the management personnel of Contra Costa
County and Riverview Fire Districts among the five districts
receiving services .
July 13, 1993
Plan for Expenditure Reductions/Functional Integration of
Fire Districts and Funding for 1993-1994
Page -4-
On June 8, 1993 the County Administrator provided the Board with a
report discussing the issue and proposing several alternatives for
the allocation of costs.
Since the release of the June 8th report we have received comments
and recommendations from three of the five Advisory Fire
Commissions . The majority recommended allocating the costs on the
basis of budget allocations because they reflect all activities of
the districts and are easily determined and verified. Chief Allen
Little and the County Administrator' s Office agree with this
recommendation.
The salary and benefit costs of the four positions (Chief and 3
Assistant Chiefs) assigned to the integrated management structure
since its inception through the end of 1992-1993 is $126,566
(annual cost $506,263 x .25 for April, May and June) . The
cost/revenue impacts on the districts for the three month period
would be as follows :
Less Credit Net District
1992-93 Cost for District Cost or
District Budget(%) Allocation Cost (Revenue)
Contra Costa 56 . 3 $ 71,257 $91,743 $(20,486 )
Moraga 6 . 1 7,720 -0- 7,720
Orinda 7 . 3 9,239 -0- 9,239
Riverview 25 .2 31,895 34,822 (2,927)
West County 5 . 1 6,455 -0- 6,455
100 . 0% $126,566 $126,566
At the end of the first quarter of 1993-1994 the issue will be
reviewed to determine what additional position costs should be
added to the shared management structure for allocation to the five
districts .
DATE: 7
RE$UEST TO SPEAK FORM
THREE (3) MINUTE LIMIT)
Complete this form and place it in the box near the speakers' rostrum before
addressing the Board. c�
NAME: �" ,` .�`I�Clvk{'4c,c� PHONE: 80 3 ` C700 U —
ADDRESS: CITY:
I am speaking formyself OR organization:
Check one: NAME OF ORCANIZV ION)
I wish to speak on Agenda Item #
My comments will be: general for against
I wish to speak on the subject of
I do not wish to speak but leave these comments for the Board to consider.
DATE: 7 11-311
REgUEST TO SPEAK FORM
(THREE (3) MINUTE LIMIT) 9
Complete this form and place it in the box near the speakers' rostrum before
addressing
�the Board.
in
NAME: L �.J V`,l 1,�1 o G' PHONE: z ZR -R 7't 2_.
ADDRESS: /91 SN at-W Y\ 0 , f1` 7-17 CITY: Y\ RCCT-11 ty E"L
I am speaking formyself ✓OR organization:
Check one: IVI
�NAE OF ORGANI7-\TION)
I wish to speak on Agenda Item #
My comments will be: general 14e for against
I wish to speak on the subject of i'/
I do not wish to speak but leave these comments for the Board to consider.
DATE: 71 ' �J
REguFmT TO SPEAK FORM
(THREE (3) MINUTE LIMIT)
Complete this form and place it in the box near the speakers' rostrum before
addressin a Board.
NAME: j PHONE: ,%�oo
ADDRESS: .0 � `�1�1, CITY: op,MA,-
I am speaking formyself OR organization:
Check one: (NAMEkbF ORGANIZATION) V
I wish to �on speak Agenda Item #
P �•
My comments will be: general for against
I wish to speak on the subject of
I do not wish to speak but leave these comments for the Board to consider.
DATE: ' '-2,� -S
REQUEST TO SPEAK FORM `�
(THREE (3) MINUTE LIMIT) /
Complete this form and place it in the box near the speakers' rostrum before
addressing the Board.
NAME: (,��u-\ f-� Uv\ C7 J S PHONE:
ADDRESS: CITY:
I am speaking formyself OR organization:
Check one: NAME OF ORGANIZATION)
I wish to speak on Agenda Item #
My comments will be: general for against
I wish to speak on the subject of
I do not wish to speak but leave these comments for the Board to consider.
DATE:
REQUEST TO SPEAK FORM
(THREE (3) MINUTE LIMIT)
Complete this form and place it in the box near the speakers' rostrum before
addressing
�the
1/Boa .
NAME: -TU/LCf,5- PHONE:
ADDRESS: P Uw,F `t•- n moi- D6�N Cny: �
C
I am speaking formyself OR organization: L ere L 1230
Check one: (NAME OF ORGA"NIZNTION)
I wish to speak on Agenda Item # 2-
V.
My comments will be: general for against
I wish to speak on the subject of
I do not wish to speak but leave these comments for the Board to consider.
DATE:
REQUEST TO SPEAK FORM
(THREE (3) MINUTE LIMIT)
Complete this form and place it in the box near the speakers' rostrum before
addressing the Board.
NAME: PHONE: -JZ,io
ADDRESS: CITY: Oita in:)E-2•
I am speaking formyself OR organization: A�55�,a��o!o
Check one: (NAME OF ORGM17ATION)
I wish to speak on Agenda Item # 2.A
My comments will be: general X for against
I wish to speak on the subject of
I do not wish to speak but leave these comments for the Board to consider.
DATE:
REQUEST TO SPEAK FORM
(THREE (3) MINUTE LIMIT)
Complete this form and place it in the box near the speakers' rostrum before
addressing the gBoard.
M
NAE: �-u•-, �, �� r: �Fn. PHONE:
ADDRESS: �� �7 ►Je e� �.( c� CITY:
I am speaking formyself OR organization: Fz.,
Check one: t� � F, ioti ��
I wish to speak on Agenda Item #
My comments will be: general for against
I wish to speak on the subjectof
I do not wish to speak but leave these comments for the Board to consider.
DATE:
REQUEST TO SPEAK FORM
(THREE (3) MINUTE LIMIT)
Complete this form and place it in the box near the speakers' rostrum before
addressing the P Iard.
NAME: .. l etic �Q�e--- PHONE: .37 �a
ADDRESS: i w �'� C f CITY: L/ p
I am speaking formyself OR organization: (-�srai;t-
Check one: (NAME OF ORGAN!%al'!ON)
I wish to speak on Agenda Item # A a
My comments will be: general X for against
- I wish to speak on the subject of
I do not wish to speak but leave these comments for the Board to consider.
DATE: l3 3.
REguEST TO SPEAK FORM
THREE (3) MINUTE LIMIT)
Complete this form and place it in the box near the speakers' rostrum before
addressing the Board. /s
NAME: /�l�RLF- CS1w u ALJPHONE:
ADDRESS: I eO T 6 {70,fer Pg . CITY: D
�tTt2�i�ls f u 0�2 GowlttT k•
I am speaking formyself OR organization: � MAZAGA F1124L r9bTEC77 ►1
Check one: N4- ,5 ORGANI%�l'fOti�
I wish to speak on Agenda Item # -A .
My comments will be: general for against
I wish to speak on the subject of
I do not wish to speak but leave these comments for the Board to consider.
DATE'
REQUEST TO SPEAK FORM
THREE (3) MINUTE LIMIT
Complete 's form and place it in the box near the speakers' rostrum before
addres i the Boar
NAME: PHONE:
ADDRESS: ;4� ; CITY: �---
I am speaki formyself OR organization•
Check one: VIME OF ORGANI/.a1'lOti)
I wish to speak on Agenda Item # 6-"�/4
My comments will be: general � for against
I wish to speak on the subject of
I do not wish to speak but leave these comments for the Board to consider.
DATE:
REQUEST TO SPEAK FORM
(THREE (3) MINUTE LIMIT
Complete this form and place it in the box near the speakers' rostrum before
addressing the Board.
NAME: �� 1. ��%lz���,J Cr• MOR PHONE: 3 7 j 0
ADDRESS: i CITY: -1)FA y F T T
I am speaking formyself OR organization:
Check one: (NAME OF ORGANIZATION)
I wish to speak on Agenda Item #
My comments will be: general for against
I wish to speak on the subject of
I do not wish to speak but leave these comments for the Board to consider.
:1 1 -T1'. 77-7-1717 -5 -rO FO 2 Ill Q NE D1..57 P-:FC'T
2, .DDN!T AZL®cr
Fc;2f Ct�pT,97irf 7' !J �� /Z �ovo Gs-oF., T ti`
r.T/Z r- C c> I.-1 o Yi.0 ( i c� " /)c i !C)� A f r 2 E C
DATE: �- � � � IJY�
REQUEST To SPEAK FORS
(THREE (3) MINUTE LIMIT /
Complete this form and place it in the box near the speakers' rostrum before
addressing the Board.
NAME:_w L,-�,- C�N vv-, Ca (ZO S -S PHONE:
ADDREss: C.(--�UV\ Crr : O 2t �-3
I am speaking formyself OR organization:
Check one: (NAME OF ORGA1q[ZA-ION)
I wish to speak on Agenda Item #
My comments will be: general for against
I wish to speak on the subject of b P,(NDN C-l'(�.�, () R,Lt Z LSI K
I do not wish to speak but leave these comments for the Board to consider.
DATE:
REQUEST TO SPEAK FORM
(THREE (3) MINUTE LIMIT)
Complete 's form and place it in the box near the speakers' rostrum before
addre s' the Boao.
NAM PHONE:
ADDRESS: U/ CITY:
I am speaking formyself OR organization:
Check one: ( E OF ORGANI%4,11ON)
/— I wish to speak on Agenda Item eral
My comments will be: gen for against
I wish to speak on the subject of
I do not wish to speak but leave these comments for the Board to consider.
DATE: 3
REQUEST TO SPEAK FORM
THREE3) MINUTE umrr)
Complete this form and place it in the box near the speakers' rostrum before
addressing the Board. / p
NAME: l V c-. K)D e- PHONE: 3
ADDRESS: c)� 8 r CITY: Uy l (?-
I am speaking formyself OR organization: tL-qaAC A F AG-- Q/v% Pnr+
Check one: (NAME OF ORGAN17ATION) y
I wish to speak on Agenda Item # LV 6L, L CAMM� l
My comments will be: general for against
I wish to speak on the subject of
I do not wish to speak but leave these comments for the Board to consider.
.• DATE: I
REQUEST TO SPEAK '' ORM
(THREE (3) MINUTE LIMIT)
Complete this form and place it in the box near the speakers' rostrum before
addressing the Board.
NAME. S PHONE:
ADDREss: "6 f �" CITY: 0 1 J—
I am speaking formyself OR organization:
Check one: (NAME OF ORGAN[Z-XTION)
I wish to speak on Agenda Item #
My comments will be: general for against
I wish to speak on the subject of aj;4, vz ,��c�Ld,c
I do not wish to speak but leave these comments for the Board to consider.
ED VINING
FIRE PROTECTION ENGINEER 'r RECEIVED
t.,..
4819 JOHN MUIR ROAD
MARTINEZ, CA 94553 JUL 1 3 1993
-41'S=228-8792
CLERK BOARD OF SUPERVISORS
CONTRA COSTO CO... .._ . ..
BOARD OF SUPERVISORS MEETING JULY 13 , 1993
I AM A MARTINEZ RESIDENT AND A SEMI-RETIRED FIRE PROTECTION
ENGINEER. I HAVE CORRESPONDED WITH YOU AND SCOTT TANDY, AND
AMONG OTHER THINGS HAVE SUGGESTED THE FORMATION OF AN
ADVISORY COMMITTEE TO WORK WITH THE FIRE ADMINISTRATION.
THE NEED FOR THIS CONCEPT SEEMS TO HAVE BEEN RECOGNIZED IN
THE PLAN FOR EXPENDITURE REDUCTIONS AND INTEGRATION OF FIRE
DISTRICTS TO BE CONSIDERED BY THE BOARD. MY CONCERN IS THAT
THE RECOMMENDED COUNCIL WOULD BY MADE UP PRIMARILY OF FIRE
SERVICE ORIENTED MEMBERS, RATHER THAN ORDINARY CITIZENS.
I URGE THAT YOU CONSIDER EXPANDING AND MODIFYING THIS
ELEMENT OF THE PLAN TO HAVE THIS BE A CITIZENS' COUNCIL. IN
ORDER THAT THE CITIZENS CAN HAVE ACCESS TO ALL THE
INFORMATION THEY NEED TO REACH CONCLUSIONS, THE FIRE SERVICE
MEMBERS SHOULD REMAIN ON THE COUNCIL. THE CITIZENS WOULD
HAVE THE BENEFIT OF THE FIRE FOLKS KNOWLEDGE, AND THE FIRE
FOLKS WOULD GET FIRST-HAND INPUT FROM THE COMMUNITY.
I HAVE ALSO POINTED OUT THAT THERE ARE IS A SIZEABLE NUMBER
OF COUNTY CITIZENS WITH BROAD FIRE PROTECTION EXPERIENCE,
BOTH, FROM WITHIN THE FIRE SERVICE AND FROM WITHOUT. SOME OF
THESE HAVE EXPRESSED INTEREST IN SHARING THEIR VIEWS AND
HELPING YOU GUIDE THE FIRE SERVICE IN THESE DIFFICULT TIMES.
v CITY OF EL CERRITO
Y �� OFFICE OF THE MAYOR
June 21, 1993
Contra Costa County Board of Supervisors
c/o Mr. Scott Tandy
Chief Assistant County Administrator
County Administration Building
651 Pine Street, 11th Floor
Martinez, CA 94553-1229
RE: Comments on Expenditure Reduction and Functional Integration Plan for
County-Governed Fire Districts
Dear Honorable Supervisors:
We wish to provide you with our comments on the proposed "Expenditure Reduction and
Functional Integration Plan for County-Governed Fire Districts". We understand that you
will be considering this plan at your upcoming meeting on June 22, 1993. Since the County
plan is fairly general, it is appropriate that our comments remain general as well.
The City of El Cerrito along with many other West Contra Costa County communities has
greatly benefitted over the years from the cooperative relationship for joint fire protection
operations between the West County Fire District, Richmond, Kensington and El Cerrito.
The foundation of this cooperative approach has been the fair contribution of resources from
each of the partner jurisdictions to obtain a full range and depth of equitable fire protection
coverage for each jurisdiction.
We are concerned that the proposed County plan may erode the commitment by the West
County Fire District to the joint operations fire protection arrangement which has served us
well for many years. Particularly, the proposed expenditure reduction measure for overtime
is troublesome. The West County joint operations partners may find themselves in a position
of having to provide coverage for any West County District station closure or staffing
cutback temporarily imposed because of a District policy commitment not to pay overtime to
cover minimum staffing levels. While the County plan for minimum staffing may work
adequately for other areas of the County, it is not practical for the West County area.
Another concern for El Cerrito is that the County plan seems to have added new
administrative burdens to an already reduced Fire District management staff. Political
sensitivities notwithstanding, the County should be clown-sizing the complexity of Fire
District policy oversight to match the reduced capacity of the administrative staff to
CITY HALL 10890 San Pablo Avenue EI Cerrito, California 94530 Fax (510) 233-5401
PRINTED ON RECYCLED PAPER
Contra Costa County Board of Supervisors -
c/o Mr. Scott Tandy
Chief Assistant County Administrator
June 21, 1993
Page Two
support the policy-making ftmction. We are concerned that the administration of the West
County Fire District would become so over-extended that they would have little time to
devote to District organizational concerns, the interests of their local citizens or the needs of
their West County joint response partners.
The City of El Cerrito remains committed to participating with the County-governed West
County Fire District in providing effective firs; protection for our communities. We urge the
Board of Supervisors to consider carefully the ramifications of cost-saving and functional
integration measures as they pertain to the West County Fire District and its ability to remain
a fully-functioning partner in our joint operations system.
Sincerely,
v
W. Mae Ritz, Mayor
WMR:slc
JW23M
Ar CITY COUNCIL
CSR CO RD OF SUF6 SOBS Scott Talan,Mayor
A COSTA CO, Anne Grodin,Vice Mayor
LAFAYETTE Ivor Samson
Donald L.Tatzin
June 21, 1993 Gayle B.Uilkema
OUR
ANNIVERSAR
Tom Torlakson, District 5 FAXED 6/21/93
Chair Board of Supervisors
651 Pine Street
11 th Floor
Martinez; Ca 94553-1286
RE: CONSOLIDATED FIRE DISTRICT
Dear Mr. Torlakson:
We are extremely disturbed to hear of the potential closure of Lafayette's Fire Station #16,
located in the Happy Valley Area. We recognize and understand the fiscal constraints you are
working under, however, neither the City of Lafayette nor Consolidated Fire District voted as
other districts did on the issue of consolidation.
It is unfair for Consolidated Fire District to subsidize fire protection in other areas of the
county. Public safety is the No. 1 priority and we should .fund this priority through all funding
means available.
We urge you to keep this station open and maintain current levels of service, as we work
together over the next few months to find mutually beneficial solutions on this matter of crucial
importance. The Lafayette/Orinda area is similar to the Oakland East Bay Fire region. We
should not knowingly put further in jeopardy the health, safety and property of citizens in this
community.
Sin relyy,�
Scott Talar �"
Mayor
ST:jag
cc:
Phil Batchelor, County Administrator
Scott Tandy, Chief Assistant County Administrator
Board of Supervisors
Allen Little, Fire Chief
Bob Adams, City Manger
Lafayette City Council
Walt Lautenberger, Happy Valley Homeowners Association
cc; 3oord M embers
CA-0
f
r-_ �" Ch 1',o
--- --- POST OFFICE BOX 1968
_.......... . ._......_ 3675 MT. DIABLO BLVD.,SUITE 210,LAFAYETTE,CA 94549-1968
TELEPHONE: (510)284-1968 FAX: (510)284-3169
01 N OF CONCORD C'I I'YCOUNCIL
1950 Pai ksidc Di i%t:. NAS/0 I
(.on(ord.C;dihn nia 9 15 19-2578 Nancv Gore,c,Nht%m
[xv (510) 798-owi(') Nkll k Dc4;11111licl. we
B�.Jon(.:;lm[)(11
Colicen(-:()I]
OFFICE OFTHE MAN OR Hm.(1 1). %1:1.s1mic
Tclephone: (51(1) 6-11-3158 luoneorn
CONTRA COSTA COUNTY
RECEIVED
June 21, 1993 JUN 2 � 1993
OFFICE OF
COUNTY ADMINISTRATOR
Scott Tandy
Chief Assistant County Administrator
County Administration Building
651 Pine Street, 11th Floor
Martinez, CA 94553-1229
Dear Mr. Tandy:
On behalf of the City Council, thank you for your recent correspondence dated
June 11, 1993. It has been distributed to Councilmembers and entered into the public
record, and will be acknowledged as received by the City Council/Redevelopment
Agency Board at its meeting of July 13, 1991
At that time, all received correspondence is either referred for a response or accepted
as information. We appreciate your taking the time to write and we value your
communication.
Sincerely,
ee-/,.
Nancy Gore
Mayor
PL2596.CM3
rn NCO RD CHI COUNCIL
'I 95(i Parkside Di ix S.,M
Com i d.(.:;tli Io i nia 1)1519-2578 Nancy
1:\X: (.510) 70,8-0630 Mai k D(!S;m1nici,Vic(!khxor
IScnnl Camph(.11
OFFICE OF IIIF.MAYOR
1- 11.Mashoic
(510) 671-3158 k III= 1al swN%all,01 N'
CONTRA COSTA COUNTY
June 28, 1993 RECEIVED
Mr. Scott Tandy EJ"LN2 9 1993
Chief Assistant County Administrator OFFICE OF
Contra Costa County Administrator COUNTY ADMINISTRATOR
651'Pine Street, 11 th Floor I
Martinez, CA 94553-1229
Dear Mr. Tandy:
This letter is in response to the Fire Districts' Expenditure Reduction and Functional Integration
Plan for fiscal year 1993-94. Although we would anticipate that the Board of'Supervisors would
delay action on this item pending disposition of State budget issues, we would encourage the
Board of Supervisors to engage interested communities and fire fighting interest in dialogue on
this proposal.
City Councilmembers discussed this proposal at our June 22, 1993 meeting with concern being
expressed in three major areas:
1) The details of the proposed reductions are not sufficient enough to determine impacts of
personnel shifts and/or reductions on County fire stations located in Concord.
2) The proposal does not address the return to source'issues associated with tax funds
through SDAF allocations from Central County to pay for services outside this area.
3) The implications of these proposed reductions should be discussed by all impacted parties
to provide input to the Board prior to action.
In addition to our general concerns the following comments are directed specifically towards the
proposal:
0 The report reflects a 10% across the board reduction in operating expenses for all
districts, but allows for the use of one time prior year capital funds in Riverview and
West County to balance the budget. Will this not leave the County with an on-going
problem for fiscal year 1994-95?
Mr. Scott Tandy
June 28, 1993
Page 2
• We are concerned that the elimination of 29.5 positions, including nine fire prevention
personnel countywide, not impact the districts ability to continue to staff County fire
stations located in Concord and the proposed station at the Cal State Hayward site in
Concord.
0 The allocation of District wide administrative cost to each subdistrict under functional
integration should be clearly understood at the beginning of this process.
• If East County volunteer stations convert to paid staffing at some future date, funding
mechanisms that are local to that area should be activated to pay for such services.
We are pleased to see the County forwarding information on cost containment for Fire service
and the County Board of Supervisors willing to consider options in light of programmed State
funding take aways. We would encourage the County to take the time necessary to fully
understand and explore the implications of this proposal. Thank you.
Sincerely,
Nancy Gre
Mayor
NG:jlu
cc: City Council
City Manager
Assistant City Manager
Deputy City Manager
OFFICE OF COUNTY ADMINISTRATOR
CONTRA COSTA COUNTY
Administration Building
Martinez, California
DATE : June 22, 1993
TO: BOARD OF SUPERVISORS
FROM: PHIL BATCHELOR
2,Co my Adam' ' tr for
lam 7 �L-
SUBJECT: FIRE DISTRICT FUNCTIONAL INTEGRATION AND EXPENDITURE
REDUCTION PLAN
The Board of Supervisors scheduled June 22, 1993 to consider action
on the subject report and plan.
Copies of the report were distributed to the chairs and
commissioners of the fire districts, Local 1230 and the Taxpayers'
Association on June 10, 1993 .
On June 11, 1993 the report was mailed to the city managers with
the request that the report be shared with the mayors of their
cities .
On June 15, 1993 the Board received the report and requested that
it be distributed to Chambers of Commerce, industrial associations
and the Contra Costa Council .
On June 18, 1993 the report was distributed to all Chambers of
Commerce in the areas of the affected fire districts, the major
industrial associations and the Contra Costa Council .
Four of the five merit system Fire Advisory Ccommissions met to
review the plan. Moraga did not meet because there were not enough
commissioners available to obtain a quorum. However, Chief Little
met with a Moraga citizens' group on the plan.
Chief Little also met with the executive board of Local 1230 and
held two meetings with the employees of the merit system fire
districts which involved approximately 100 employees .
TO: COUNTY BOARD OF SUPERVISORS, JUNE 1, 1993
FROM: THE CITIZENS SUPPORT COMMITTEE FOR MORAGA FIRE
PROTECTION DISTRICT PARAMEDIC AND FIRE SERVICES
RE: POSITION PAPER ON THE MFPD RESTRUCTURING AS A
PART OF FUNCTIONAL INTEGRATION
OBJECTIVES:
1.The Moraga Fire Protection District Paramedic/Fire Fighter E.M.T. Program
be kept intact and provide the high level of service it has in the past.
2.The residents of the MFPD be assured that:
A. Our fire flow tax fiends will be used only within our MFPD and
spending decisions will remain as in the past.
B.The existence of our fire flow tax funds shall have no bearing on
the budgeting and distribution of all other State and County funds
available to all fire districts.
C. Our existing and future fire and rescue apparatus remain within
the MFPD and not be transferred elsewhere except for temporary
emergency fire or rescue crises.
D. Donations made to Rescue One Foundation and purchases made
by the Foundation remain in the MFPD.
3.The Moraga Fire Commission remain as currently organized, and continue
to play its Leadership role with the MFPD Chief Officer in establishing the
MFPD's budget and tax rate.
4.The boundary lines of the MFPD,and the name "Moraga Fire Protection District"
remain as currently designated, as legally necessary for:
A. Protection of the Fire Flow Tax Authority, and
RECEIVED
B. Protection for the life-long contractual agreement for the
Paramedic Program ambulances. JUL 13 19c,3
IMPLEMENTATION:
CLERK BOARD OF SUF ERVISORS
CONTRA COST CO. _ _
In support of these objectives, the following are essential for maintaininb y-"
previous level of service:
1.A full time on-site Chief Officer with background and experience in
Paramedic Service,fire protection,operations and budgeting be appointed
to administer the MFPD.
2. Our current full time (or two-half-time)on-site clerical position be maintained
in support of the full time on-site Chief Officer,other staff and the
Moraga Fire Commission.
3. Our administration building remain as headquarters for our Chief Officer and
staff, and continue to be available for community use.
Moraga Fire Dif trict
1280 Moraga Way, Moraga, CA 94556
Ed Lucas. Fire Chief (415) 376-5454
March 30, 1993
Mr. Tom Torlakson, Chair
Board of Supervisors
Contra Costa County
651 Pine St.
Martinez, CA 94553
Dear Chairman Torlakson,
The Moraga Fire Commission met on March 29th to discuss the
retirement of Provisional Fire Chief John Cooper and the need to
insure effective fire and paramedic/ambulance operations in our
district during the reorganization of county fire services.
Chief Cooper has recommended that Fire Captain Robert Goodyear be
placed in a temporary position as Provisional Assistant Chief to
insure continued operational level management of the district.
We support that recommendation and we ask that your board approve
this request for a temporary provisional appointment.
We have the utmost confidence in Robert Goodyears ' professional
ability both as an experienced fire command officer and former
paramedic. Captain Goodyear has prior experience in the Acting
Assistant Chiefs position and knows the internal operations of
our fire district well . Captain Goodyear would serve a useful
role to any interim department head the board may select and
could assist in coordinating the reorganization of our fire
district.
We also respectfully request that the matter of the future of
the Moraga Fire Protection District be placed on either the
April 20, or April 27 , Board of Supervisors agenda. As you can
imagine, our commission and many of the citizens of our district
are very concerned about the options for long term administration
of our highly successful and financially solvent fire district.
Our fire commission has several recommendations that we need to
review and share with your board on either of these dates.
Sincerely,
Gordon Nathan, Chair
Moraga Fire Commission
cc Moraga Fire Commission