Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAboutAgenda - Agenda Packets - Regular Meeting 5/2/1995AGENDA SAN JACINTO CITY COUNCIL AND THE CITY COUNCIL SITTING AS THE REDEVELOPMENT AGENCY AND INDUSTRIAL DEVELOPMENT AUTHORITY AND THE SAN JACINTO FINANCING AUTHORITY DATE: May 2, 1995 TIME: 7:30 P.M. PLACE: COMMUNITY CENTER 625 SOUTH PICO SAN JACINTO, CALIFORNIA 1.0 CALL TO ORDER Roll Call Prayer of Invocation - Pastor Eugene Van Zee Pledge of Allegiance 2.0 SPECIAL PRESENTATIONS 3.0 PUBLIC COMMENTS Any person may address the Council on any subject pertaining to city business not listed on the agenda, during this portion of the meeting. A limitation of three (3) minutes shall be set for each person desiring to address the Council. 4.0 REDEVELOPMENT AGENCY 5.0 CONSENT CALENDAR - CITY COUNCIL/REDEVELOPMENT AGENCY All matters listed under Consent Calendar are considered to be routine and will be enacted by one motion by the City Council in the form listed. There will be no separate discussion on these items prior to the motion unless members of the City Council, staff or the public requests specified items to be removed and/or discussed. 1 Anyone wishing to discuss a Consent Calendar item should come forward, upon invitation of the Mayor, state their name, address and the Consent Calendar item number. Speakers should limit comments to three (3) minutes. Convene the Redevelopment Agency in joint session with the City Council for considerations of the following items: 5.1 Minutes of Regular Meeting of April 4, 1995 RECOMMENDATION: Approve the Minutes of the Regular Meeting of April 4, 1995, as presented. 5.2 Minutes of Special Meeting of April 10, 1995 RECOMMENDATION: Approve the Minutes of the Special Meeting of April 10, 1995, as presented. 5.3 Minutes of Special Meeting of April 17. 1995 RECOMMENDATION: Approve the Minutes of the Special Meeting of April 17, 1995, as presented. 5.4 Warrant Register RECOMMENDATION: Approve warrant numbers 40245 through 40349 dated April 30, 1995 in the amount of $253,164.93 and Payroll check numbers 5060 through 5143 dated April 14, 1995. 5.5 Designation of Principal and Alternate Staff Representatives to the Coachella Valley Joint Powers Insurance Authority RECOMMENDATION: Designate Interim Finance Director Larry Weaver as the primary San Jacinto representative and Assistant to the City Manager Rod Butler as the alternate San Jacinto representative to the Coachella Valley Joint Powers Insurance Authority Board of Directors. 5.6 Adoption of Resolution Initiating the Fiscal Year 1995-96 Annual Update of Landscaping, Lighting, and Park District No.1 RECOMMENDATION: Adopt Resolution No. 95- Initiating the Fiscal Year 1995-96 Annual Update of Landscaping, Lighting and Park District No. 1 2 RESOLUTION NO. 95- A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF SAN JACINTO, CALIFORNIA INITIATING PROCEEDINGS FOR THE 1995-96 FISCAL YEAR ANNUAL UPDATE OF LANDSCAPING, LIGHTING AND PARK DISTRICT NO. 1; A CITY-WIDE ASSESSMENT DISTRICT; PURSUANT TO THE LANDSCAPING AND LIGHTING ACT OF 1972 5.7 Contract for Services with Berryman and Henigar for Assessment Engineering Services - Evans RECOMMENDATION: Approve the contract for services with Berryman and Henigar for Lighting, Landscape and Maintenance District Assessment Engineering Services. END OF CONSENT CALENDAR Motion by: Seconded by: to approve consent calendar items 5.1 through 5.7 and adopt Resolution No. 95- through Resolution No. 95- Adjourn the Redevelopment Agency and continue acting in the capacity of the City Council for the remainder of the agenda. 6.0 PUBLIC HEARINGS 6.1 UNADVERTISED - Introduction of Ordinance - Fee Deferral Program - McNabb RECOMMENDATION: Waive the reading in full, read by title and introduce (First Reading) Ordinance No. thereby extending the interim development fee waiver/deferral program to June 30, 1996. ORDINANCE NO. AN ORDINANCE OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF SAN JACINTO, CALIFORNIA, EXTENDING TO JUNE 30, 1996, THE INTERIM FEE AND PAYMENT POLICY SCHEDULE FOR SINGLE FAMILY RESIDENTIAL AND COMMERCIAL/INDUSTRIAL DEVELOPMENT ESTABLISHED BY ORDINANCE NO. 1000, WHICH EXPIRES ON JUNE 30, 1995 3 7.0 CITY DEPARTMENTS 7.1 Fire Department Alternatives - Price RECOMMENDATION: 1. Give direction to staff on how to proceed 2. Approve specified service level in draft Request for Proposal. 7.2 Police Memorial Caravan - Holmes RECOMMENDATION: Approval of one police unit to participate in a Statewide memorial caravan to the Police Memorial services in Sacramento, at a cost of approximately $55.00. 7.3 City Sponsored Auction - Evans RECOMMENDATION: Receive and file. 7.4 Additional Allocation of Community Development Block Grant funds - Fiscal Year 1995-96 - Butler RECOMMENDATION: Direct staff to place the additional $37,563 Community Development Block Grant allocation in one of the two previously approved city projects for the 1995-96 Fiscal Year, or suggest ideas for a new project (non-public service) to which the additional funds could be programmed. 7.5 Approval of Plans and Specifications for the Improvement of the San Jacinto River Crossing at Lake Park Drive and Authorization to Advertise for Bids - Evans RECOMMENDATION: Approve the plans and specifications for Improvement of the San Jacinto River Crossing at Lake Park Drive and authorize staff to advertise for bids. 7.6 Support of WRCOG Positions on the Re -Authorization of the Federal Endangered Species Act - Hults RECOMMENDATION: Adopt Resolution No. 95- in support of the WRCOG positions on the re -authorization of the federal Endangered Species Act. RESOLUTION NO. 95- A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF SAN JACINTO, CALIFORNIA, SUPPORTING AMENDMENTS TO THE FEDERAL ENDANGERED SPECIES ACT 4 7.7 General Fund and Service Level Issues - McNabb/Holmes/Price/Butler/Weaver RECOMMENDATION: Receive for information and provide direction to staff, as appropriate. 8.0 MAYOR/COUNCILMEMBER REPORTS/DISCUSSIONS 8.1 Outside Agency/ADHOC Committee Appointments - Solorio RECOMMENDATION: Confirm the attached list of Council appointments to other agency committees. 8.2 Update on Vosburg Hotel - Oaks 8.3 May 23rd Study Session 8.4 Proposed Joint Meeting with the San Jacinto Chamber of Commerce 9.0 CLOSED SESSION 9.1 Conference with Legal Counsel - Existing Litigation Purs ant to ( D �� Government Code Section 54956.9(jMargaret Cameron vs. City of (O l3 San Jacinto 10.0 ADJOURNMENT Motion by: Seconded: Action: to adjourn. Vote: I, Bob Wilson, City Clerk of the City of San Jacinto, do hereby certify that I caused to be posted the foregoing agenda this 27th day of April, 1995, as required by law. Je.uty City CI 5 ..�,ADA S • S A N 'JACI NTO Staff Report TO: Honorable Mayor and Members of the City Council FROM: Pamela L. Lee, Deputy City Clerk Via: Pamela S. Easter, City Manager DATE: May 2, 1995 RE: Minutes of Regular Meeting of April 4, 1995 RECOMMENDATION: Approve the Minutes of the Regular Meeting of April 4, 1995, as presented. MINUTES SAN JACINTO CITY COUNCIL AND THE CITY COUNCIL SITTING AS THE REDEVELOPMENT AGENCY AND INDUSTRIAL DEVELOPMENT AUTHORITY AND THE SAN JACINTO FINANCING AUTHORITY APRIL 4, 1995 1.0 CALL TO ORDER The Regular Meeting of the San Jacinto City Council was called to order at 7:37 P.M. by Mayor Pro Tem Solorio in the Community Center, 625 South Pico, San Jacinto, California. Present: Councilmembers Leahy, Oaks, Williams and Mayor Pro Tem Solorio Absent: Council Seat Vacant A Moment of Silence was Observed for Reflection. Pledge of Allegiance was led by Mayor Pro Tem Solorio. 2.0 SPECIAL PRESENTATIONS 2.1 Employee of the 1st Quarter of 1995 Interim Finance Director Weaver made a presentation to Rob Thomas, Customer Service Representative. Mayor Pro Tem Solaria introduced the new Assistant to the City Manager, Rod Butler. 2.2 San Jacinto Valley Museum Association Presentation Jack Warneke, President of the San Jacinto Valley Museum Association, made a presentation giving some background distinguishing the difference between their organization and the City Board. Their purpose was to assist the City Board by providing financial support and broad based community enthusiasm. There had been a break down in the communications between the City and the City Board. Explained the background on the County's acquisition of the Estudillo Mansion, and the plans to relocate the museum there. Felt some of the controversial issues were now behind everyone and urged moving forward in a positive manner. Presently it appeared the Estudillo Mansion was expected to be 1 April 4, 1995 more costly for restoration than originally thought, but work was expected to begin in the fall. The County would provide housing but no financial support. The costs of the past would remain constant, which was about $15,000, including utilities. Their association raised additional funds through association dues, fund raising activities, and donations. They would like a City representative who would be responsible for communications between their joint organizations and the City. They would not have to attend the meetings, although the meetings lasted about an hour, every other month. They needed someone who could answer questions and provide information. Someone to whom minutes and treasurer's reports would be provided. Invited all in attendance to join them for their next meeting, the following week. They would have the President of the Mt. San Jacinto Community College as their speaker. Councilmember Leahy stated the City's Mission Statement indicated Council support to preserve their heritage and felt the museum was at the forefront of that effort. Mayor Pro Tem Solorio suggested that Ms. Leahy attend the next meeting, and further that staff establish communications with the Museum Board. City Manager Easter suggested the Museum Board provide her office with minutes and their newsletter, which she would distribute as part of her updates. 3.0 PUBLIC COMMENTS Mayor Pro Tem Solorio cautioned the speaker of the limitation on derogatory remarks against individuals, and the three minute limitation. John Padilla reiterated his comments and statements from the March 21, 1995, City Council meeting, pertaining to Chicano studies. Felt that programs helping youth were designed for failure. Felt youth were bombarded with harassment, stopped for no reason and chased out of the schools. They had been controlled and oppressed. He did not blame them for being in gangs and supported them under those conditions. Lester Roulett commended the City for prior actions on citizen complaints. However, there was still a situation. Wanted to know who was responsible for the landscaping, because the weeds were higher than the plants. Also the 2 April 4, 1995 overgrowth of weeds where models were going to be built. Appreciated the fine work of Mr. Wilson the prior year. City Manager Easter indicated that Mr. Wilson would follow up on the weeds issue. Noted that Premier Homes was still responsible for the landscaping maintenance. Planning staff would follow up with a demand on the builder for areas still under development. Bob Zambon noted the following areas of concern: 1) Lake Esplanade, west of Valley Wide. A puddle large enough to nearly cause an accident. Requested that the City pump or drain the area. 2) Railroad track, east on State Street. The tracks were up 2-3 inches and created a hazard. Requested that asphalt be added to level it out. 3) Urged Council to consider Councilmember Leahy for Mayor based on her prior service representing the people. City Manager Easter clarified that Council had previously approved an improvement project by Matich, which included asphalt replacement around deteriorating railroad tracks. That would occur in the next few months. Community Development Director McNabb explained that the Esplanade widening project allowed for drainage, which was to drain into a ditch that was not deep enough. The area in question, was on County right-of-way. The City had made some attempts to drain the area, which was over saturated and some drains were clogged, but they were unsuccessful. Valley Wide attempted to address the issue with the new parking lot construction, but lacked the necessary funding. Staff had discussed the situation with the County, and unless a cross gutter were installed across Esplanade, the matter would not be resolved until the area was connected to the master drainage plan north of the area. City Manager Easter suggested that staff follow up and correspond with the County on a long term solution. At the hour of 8:10 P.M. convened the Redevelopment Agency in joint session with the City Council for consideration of the following items: April 4, 1995 4.0 REDEVELOPMENT AGENCY None 5.0 CONSENT CALENDAR - CITY COUNCIL/REDEVELOPMENT AGENCY COUNCIL CONSENSUS to pull item 5.4 for separate consideration. A MOTION was made by Councilmember Leahy, seconded by Councilmember Oaks, to approve the consent calendar as presented, with the exception of item 5.4, to be discussed separately. Motion carried on a 4-0 vote with one Council seat vacant. 5.1 Treasurers' Report - February 1995 Received and filed. 5.2 Warrant Register Approved warrant numbers 40004 through 40132, dated March 30, 1995, in the amount of $272,725.48 and Payroll check numbers 4887 through 4980, dated March 17, 1995. 5.3 Position/Job Description Landscape and Irrigation Leadworker (Public Works Department) Approved the position and job description of Landscape and Irrigation Leadworker in the Public Works Department. 5.4 Bond Release Tract 21900 & 21900-1 (Soboba Village IV) Applicant: American Motorists Insurance Company Removed for separate consideration. 5.5 Bond Release Tract 24330-1 and Tract 24330-3 Location: North side of Ramona Expressway, at Chase Street (Tract 24330-1, Corsica/Las Brisas); and west side of State Street, north of Community College Drive (Tract 24330-3, Las Brisas Model Site) Released the Performance/Labor and Material Bond #989521 S for Tract 24330-1; and Released the Performance/Labor and Material Bond #206338S for Tract 24330-3. 4 April 4, 1995 5.6 Jordan & Shaver Apartment Conversion - Architectural Design Contract Acting in their capacity as the Redevelopment Agency, awarded the contract to Herron and Rumansoff Architects, Inc., for architectural services necessary to convert five dilapidated apartments into three detached single-family dwellings, in an amount not to exceed $11,400.00. ITEM REMOVED FROM CONSENT CALENDAR FOR SEPARATE CONSIDERATION: 5.4 Bond Release Tract 21900 & 21900-1 (Soboba Village IV) Applicant: American Motorists Insurance Company Ken Brass requested disapproval of bond release for the following reasons: 1) The asphalt paving on Verona at Chabella, there was a depression 1-1/2 feet deep and 4' x 5" in width and length. 2) The asphalt texture was porous and lots of pebbles were loose. Public Works Director Evans indicated he had met with the inspector earlier in the day, who was convinced the contractor had returned and corrected any necessary repairs. Suggested Council approve the bond release subject to a further inspection by staff. Noting that staff would not release the bonds until the pavement met specifications. A MOTION was made by Councilmember Williams, seconded by Councilmember Oaks, to release Labor/Material and Performance Bond #3SM 708 694 00 for Tract 21900; Release Labor/Material and Performance Bond #3SM 708 695 00 for Tract 21900-1, subject to staff satisfaction that the depression was fixed. MOTION AMENDED to include that staff approve the quality of the asphalt as well. Motion carried on a 4-0 vote with one Council seat vacant. At the hour of 8:19 P.M. adjourned the Redevelopment Agency and continued acting in their capacity as the City Council for the remainder of the agenda. 6.0 PUBLIC HEARINGS 5 April 4, 1995 6.1 Hearing to Receive Objections and Protests to the Demolition Charges for Las Brisas Model Complex; Confirmation/Resection/Amendment of Report; Order of Special Assessment Community Development Director McNabb made a presentation as contained in the staff report on file with the City Clerk. In response to Council inquiry, advised there were taxes in arrears, of about three years, and it would probably take two years to recover costs. Mayor Pro Tem Solorio opened the public hearing. There being no speakers wishing to present testimony, the public hearing was closed. A MOTION was made by Councilmember Leahy, seconded by Councilmember Oaks, to approve the report of the Public Works Director with reference to the charges for demolition to the assessed; and adopt Resolution No. 95-18, confirming the report and ordered the assessment against the real property. Motion carried on a 4-0 vote with one Council seat vacant. RESOLUTION NO. 95-18 A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL FOR THE CITY OF SAN JACINTO CONFIRMING THE REPORT OF THE PUBLIC WORKS DIRECTOR FOLLOWING DEMOLITION OF DANGEROUS BUILDINGS AND ORDERING A SPECIAL ASSESSMENT UPON THE REAL PROPERTY (APN: 433-030-025-0) 6.2 City -to -City Recycling Program Rate Structure Mayor Pro Tem Solorio inquired if the City Clerk had received any written protests. City Clerk Wilson announced one written protest from Mr. Swanson, a copy of which was distributed to Council. Councilmember Leahy requested, and was granted, the opportunity to make an opening statement to the audience. Noted that the recycling issue had been under discussion for over three years, in order to come up with the best solution to a complex issue. Explained the state mandate which required the Council action, and the penalties if they failed to do so. Explained the survey, at a cost of $40,000 which identified the plan and how it would be accomplished and meet all reporting requirements. Further, explained all the meetings held with OK Associates and the 6 April 4, 1995 inability to reach an agreement, particularly on the credit customers would receive for the loss of one trash pick up per week. With the time constraints, Council had to move forward to begin the program to meet the state mandate. Contract approval had been taken at a prior meeting. OK Associates had broke off negotiations, and the City was not aware why, but proceeded under the circumstances. The City was back at square one and had to resolve the matter. Then the community was led to believe that the Council could change their mind and negotiate again with OK Associates, when in fact, they could not change direction again. Council had to meet the mandate as soon as possible. The action under consideration was the rates to charge the citizens for the program. Invited the audience to also remain for the Mayor selection later on the agenda. City Manager Easter invited Joyce Marshall to review the rate structure proposed. Joyce Marshall made a presentation as contained in the staff report on file with the City Clerk. Gave a brief history of the process and identified the various rate structures. At the request of Council, explained the SRRE, recycling elements and the ten year plan. Displayed overheads so the audience could see what was contained in the staff report. Clarified that the mobile home residents with current curbside refuse collection would have 17 gallon trays and commingle recyclables every other week, and green waste weekly. Others meeting the criteria could be eligible for that also, or could opt for the single family program with a 64 gallon automatic container on a weekly basis. The options for commercial businesses were for larger reductions, and had the potential for a loss of revenue to the City. Explained the process of identifying contamination, noticing customers, and an ultimate charge if the contamination continued. Explained the cost was determined based on the implementation cost for each element of the program. 1) The business license fee modification, based on the level of participation, was recommended for deletion, so there would be no cost. 2) The total cost for source reduction, $60,000, was recommended for deletion to reduce cost because areas were identified which were covered by the City, as well as WRCOG. April 4, 1995 Ms. Marshall clarified for Council, that the report had been forwarded to the Waste Management Board, and was currently being revised to reduce the expense. The original cost was $1,204,800 and was now proposed to be an additional $2,000 above the City to City agreement cost. The two largest component costs were the special waste component and the special education component. The SRRE element for the first item was $563,100 and the second was $73,555. The proposal would actually cost $12,044, the majority of which would be for the Assistant to the City Manager to oversee the implementation of the SRRE. The fiscal impact for all the SRRE programs that were not covered in the city to city agreement would be $22,900. The prior year, the City received some pass through funds from the tipping fees, and it was anticipated there would be approximately $9,500 from that source, thereby reducing the implementation cost to $13,400. Using that figure, it was determined to add 10 cents per month for residential and $1.82 for commercial. In response to Council inquiry, advised that all funds generated from the sale of commodities would go back into the city program. Council could review each year, and determine if that would result in a reduction in the rate. Again, the current status of mobile home parks was not limited, and the options, as outlined previously, would apply. Stated there were no additional costs for containers unless they opted for a centralized, and they could purchase the 17 gallon containers through the City to City program for $3.00. Councilmember encouraged individuals to continue supporting recycling with non-profit organizations. Mayor Pro Tem Solorio opened the public hearing. Pete Hansen inquired if Heritage Ranch was single family or mobile home designation? Was not clear on the cost for the different size containers, limit on the number of containers, and how often they would be picked up? City Manager Easter clarified that Heritage Ranch had both central and individual collection. They could qualify for Mobile Home rate and have commingle recycling at curbside in a 17 gallon hand tray, and green waste placed in plastic bags, to be picked up every week. April 4, 1995 Harry Spitz expressed his opinion, rather than an evaluation of either the City to City agreement or OK Associates. Favored OK Associates, who was already doing pickups in San Jacinto. Did not want San Jacinto to become a junior sister to the City of Hemet. Cited a recent incident in Hemet, which did not speak well for their financial genius. Feared that San Jacinto would be shortchanged by the City to City agreement. He desired there be an independent entity to which citizens could make a valid complaint for a valid reason. Mayor Pro Tem Solorio requested the audience to follow the rules for decorum and refrain from applause and additional sounds from the audience, in order to keep the meeting moving forward and allow everyone an opportunity to speak. Wesley Morrett declined to speak, indicating he had been given misleading information prior to attending the meeting. Richard Brewer stated he was opposed, not only to the rate, but to the City to City agreement. Cited another cooperative agreement with the City of Hemet as an example of his concern, that it did not work in favor of the City. Urged Council to consider not just cost, but the convenience. Felt Council owed the citizens a reason or rationale for taking the higher price and not enforcing the existing provisions of the contract with OK Associates. He requested a response. Councilmember Oaks indicated there may have been some misunderstanding, because the contract was already settled and the hearing presently was to set the rates. Councilmember Leahy felt it was important for the public to understand that the rates quoted in the newspaper were misleading. The OK Associates rate would still have to be negotiated to determine who would pay for all the reports and the required education, which was mandated and had to be paid for somehow. The OK Associates rate did not reflect those additional costs. The best deal which could be arrived at was being presented by staff. R.J. Stevens indicated, after reading all the material, did not understand what the $1.82 was for, per ton or what? Noted that OK Associates was currently recycling at no cost and did not understand why Waste Management did not pick up for the City at no charge? Once the rate was April 4, 1995 set, would the City subsidize Waste Management for what they picked up out of the general fund or recycling funds? City Manager Easter explained the commercial cost to the business, which would be levied on a business per month, or, if businesses wished to share one bin, there would be just one bin charge for implementation of the SRRE. The OK Associates recycling was on a voluntary basis, which they could continue. The City Attorney advised OK Associates they could continue voluntary recycling. However, because the program was a mandatory rate program, businesses would be charged for recycling even if they voluntarily recycled with OK Associates. Further, the City Attorney advised that Waste Management had given up virtually all previous refuse service to businesses outside their routine schedule. Robert Hinson questioned why Council would accept workers compensation liability with the current financial restraints, and why spend $.5 million, when they could get 50% of the recycling revenue without spending any money? Did it really matter what the people wanted? He had a business in Hemet, and his cost was $61.00 per month. Marie Weckmann indicated it was her opinion that she believed the recycling issue was before hand, a long time ago and Council should have been look at options. Now they were forced to go with the City to City agreement. The people trusted and did not act to oppose the City to City agreement. Under the circumstances, did not want to be a part of the Hemet chaos for the next 2-3 years and Council should continue to negotiate with OK Associates, because they would do a better job for the citizens of San Jacinto. Ben Kazaroff deferred his speaking time to Mr. Jeglin. Marvin Jeglin stated he was speaking on behalf of OK Associates. Felt the citizens should receive a fair rate that truly reflected the cost of recycling. Displayed a chart, which he stated compared the rates proposed by OK Associates versus the City to City agreement. When considering what was fair, they had to determine the way to gage that. On the OK Associates side, in the green, was $1.58 and $2.28, while on the other side, for single family, for the City to City agreement it was $3.33. Noted, that as part of the 1992 contract for waste hauling, there was included an option in the contract to do manual recycling for $1.58. The City to City agreement did not have such an agreement or option. 10 April 4, 1995 Comparing the $1.58 manual collection, explained the driver would get out at the pick up point and empty containers in the truck. In the automatic system, the driver would sit in the truck and an arm would pick up. There would be no visual inspection. Maybe it was not fair to compare automatic with manual, but both accomplish the same thing, allowing the City to meet their goals. If one wanted to compare automatic to automatic, San Jacinto received a proposal, which Council adopted in November, 1994, where in fact negotiation of that proposal was to provide the same service that the City to City agreement called for, except the $3.33 would be $2.28. For that reason, again, to be fair to the citizens, Council should consider a rate of $2.28. Unfortunately, the budget provided by the City on the City to City agreement, did not allow recycling to be accomplished for those rates, as bid by private business. The proposed $3.33 was not even a true cost of the program. The true cost, by the City's own figures, could be $3.59 for residential recycling, way different than the $3.33, based on only 50% depreciation, not 100%. When factoring in the 100% figures by the City, it showed a true cost of $3.59. Why this would be important, is that in over coming the 5-7 years of capital investment for equipment and vehicles, they would have to renew, and that came from the depreciation factor. Consequently, the $3.33 proposal would be to adopt a 50% shortfall. Would hope the City could be fair and truthful in their decision. Councilmember Leahy inquired of Mr. Jeglin, if the $1.58 included the cost of doing all the reports mandated by the state, and the education cost to put on a recycling program? Mr. Jeglin believed that section 6.3 talked about operational reports provided to the City by the waste hauler. He understood some reporting was not covered in the $1.58, and might be covered in the 10 cents for the SRRE. Section 6.3 dealt with operations reports, and in addition, dealing with public education, which was covered at 6.07 of Section 6. He believed the contractor would provide flyers and educate the public about the recycling situation and how to go about it. They would make public service announcements on local radio station, and all would have to be approved by the administration contractor and the City Attorney, as well as the flyers. They would also staff telephone lines so people with questions could contact OK Associates to get their questions answered about recycling. So on education, the answer was yes. 11 April 4, 1995 Councilmember Leahy wanted to clarify for everyone in the room, they were talking about $1.58 now. This was not part of the negotiations when they started at the end of September. They came back with $1.58 after Council voted for the City to City agreement. She was familiar with Section 6, and none of the foregoing was brought into negotiations. It would have been nicer to be able to take a step back in time and change, but the course had been set. The City was a quarter of the way into a year in which recycling was to be in place. The City could not change the course without incurring the possibility of serious fines. The City would have to go back to square one. The City tried and failed, and it was misleading to the people. The people needed to see the figures and understand fully the ramifications of what was happening. Heidi Ward was in favor of recycling, but had questions. She was already recycling and making money from it, why would she give it to the City? Did not want to change what she was already doing. If the City did not take the 100% depreciation, how would they replace equipment? At the end of the line, where would the money come from? Why would the City be excited about being with Hemet, since they would not be getting anything out of it? Was there anything the City could do, other than with Hemet? Council needed to listen to the citizens of San Jacinto. Was it too late, or was there something they do? If not, what good was it for the public to be present? Would appreciate an answer, was it too late? She was present at other meetings, making the same request. Did not feel that anything should be given to Hemet. The community wanted more for San Jacinto, not just Hemet to benefit. There were far too many major problems with the proposal and she could not see San Jacinto benefiting from the proposal. Should not be paying more for what was already being done. City Manager Easter explained that those already recycling could continue to do so, but in addition, the recycling program would be able to accept cardboard, green waste and an expansion of the aluminum, which could be recycled, all of which was not recyclable currently. Ms. Marshall identified the different additional items for which the waste hauler would have a market for. 12 April4, 1995 Councilmember Leahy reiterated that Council was trying to get the best deal they could for the City, as they were also citizens who would pay and receive the same services. The law mandated that Council move forward and the die was cast. Several individuals inquired from the audience, then why was the hearing being held? Greg & Alan Oganesian gave their speaking time to Mr. Jeglin. Marvin Jeglin, speaking on behalf of Messrs. Oganesian, wanted the record to reflect his response to Ms. Leahy. Relative to the $1.58, that option had been in the city contract with OK Associates since July, 1992, and it was up to the City to trigger that option, as well as various other paragraphs, which had been available the whole time. The automatic bid was put in last fall and negotiated during the winter, and was just that. As for the $1.58 for a manual system, he had been informed that the City was not interested in that option. For that reason, it was incumbent on the City to be familiar with the terms of the options, and it would have been in the best interest of the citizens to adopt that option. However, the hearing was to talk about the rate structure, and again, he requested Council to be truthful with the citizens on the cost of the City to City agreement. Earlier comments, dealing with the resolution or termination of the particular negotiations over the automated system, heard earlier, was apparently OK Associates had walked out. It was their understanding there was nothing more to talk about. They had reached an impasse on the $2.26. Council wanted a reduction on the waste side of the automated proposal, and that was their recall of the events. Al the other issues, including revenue sharing of 50/50 of the gross proceeds, they had reached an agreement in principle and were very close. Then there was the impasse at the $2.26 and the City wanting to review his clients private books, and those were the stumbling blocks. He believed there had been a mis- characterization, that his clients had walked from the negotiations. It was true the negotiations were terminated, from their perception, by being told there was nothing more to talk about. In addition, he was surprised the City would invest $.5 million in City funds on the odd chance of collecting money on the recycling effort, when OK Associates was willing to give 50%. 13 April 4, 1995 Councilmember Oaks took issue with the foregoing discussion, stating it was also his understanding that the parties came back into the room and OK Associates refused to budge on providing information on why, with a reduction of twice weekly to once weekly refuse collection, it was a savings of only $0.50 monthly, and refused to explain the amount. The City was willing to listen to any rationale for the figure, but OK Associates said it was $0.50 or nothing and packed up and left. Councilmember Leahy stated that came midway in the negotiations that specifically looked at options, not only automatic, but brought up the lower cost for manual. Those were two options they attempted to negotiate so they could look at both side and get the lowest possible rates. Ards Lowenberg stated she was part of the original Recycling Focus Group, and recognized that no changes could be made, and the City had to go with the City to City agreement. However, she had two objections and felt compelled to speak, realizing it was too late. Did not want to see the City in the recycling business, and there was still a need for private enterprise because the competition would help the cost and service. Jim Connor felt the emotions of the crowd. He believed also, in private enterprise, as opposed to bureaucracy. Cited some federal examples which lacked privatization. Could see the proposal was going to cost 30% more, and could not believe the rationale for the City to City agreement being better. Especially with the investment of $600,000 of the citizen's money. Felt the matter should be put to a vote of the citizens, on a ballot, and see what the citizens think. The Council was elected by the people, but they were not representing them well with the proposed action. Paul Ryan, San Bernardino/Riverside County Disposal Association, made a presentation as submitted in writing. The comments were in opposition to moving away from the utilization of private waste haulers, feeling that private enterprise could provide the service more economically. Private enterprise had the most experience and capability, and the return to the agencies would be provided through business licenses, taxes and franchise fees. Urged Council to review their waste policy position prior to voting. Steve Silcox stated he thought it sounded like Council was feeling hurt and hesitant to do anything. Inquired what would happen if trays were lost or stolen, who would be responsible? Concerned the City would pick 14 April 4, 1995 up the tab. Concerned about the reduction from $72,000 to $15,000 for education, and the effects? Concerned that all the talk of the extra cost to fulfill requirements for the program and the further reduction. Finally, would the City receive any of the profits from Hemet for recycling? Noting that Council needed to move forward, and stated they could evaluate after a year or two. Suggested, if it was fine after two years, then go with them. Ms. Easter stated that profits would be in the form of sales of recyclables, which would come back to San Jacinto 100%. Ms. Marshall stated that if trays were lost or stolen, each contained a serial number and were usually relocated, but citizens would not be charged. Regarding the advertising and public education, both City staffs looked at all the factors, and the cost of an effective program was covered by the proposed rate. Dorothy Baggett was against the City going into the recycling business and thought that going with Hemet would be even worse. Inquired if bins were paid for in the regular payment, and how long that would last? Had the contract been signed and delivered? Why was it too late to do anything? Cited a situation in Orange County, which was not equitable to their citizens. Did not approve of the bins and trays. Was opposed to going with Hemet and putting all the money in to help them. Ms. Marshall noted the container choices were 64 gallon on wheels and a 17 gallon by hand. Where there were seniors, with limited space, they would be automated and on wheels, every two weeks. Some would be switched to the larger containers to make it easier for the retired. Ms. Easter stated the cost of the containers, $583,000, was a capital expenditure, including the cost of two trucks, to be purchased through Certificates of Participation, which the City would pay on over the 7 year life. Ms. Marshall clarified the confusion, that no costs were coming from the City's general fund. The rates would cover the cost 100%, including the capital outlay. Ms. Easter clarified further, there was no up front investment of $583,000. No funds would leave the City coffers and go to Hemet. Funding would be through the Certificates of Participation, to be paid over the seven 15 April4, 1995 years. Council had approved a 50% depreciation to provide for new equipment and replacements. That would come from the rate charged. Council had approved the City to City agreement at the last meeting, and Hemet staff proceeded to place a reservation for the necessary equipment. The bid would probably be awarded at an April 11, 1995, meeting. Ms. Baggett inquired how long the monthly payment would last? Inquired, why buy trucks for Hemet? Ms. Easter explained that the cost was being spread over a period of seven years. The purchase of trucks was through a Hemet bid process and they would be dedicated for use in San Jacinto. There being no further speakers wishing to present testimony, Mayor Pro Tem Solorio closed the public hearing. Councilmember Williams requested the audience remain to hear Council's response and the facts, which would be of interest. Following outbursts from the audience, Mayor Pro Tem Solorio requested the audience listen to Council comments. Stated the current process was to establish the rates for the program, which had been under review for the past two years. Councilmember Oaks stated the audience had their chance to speak, and now it was Council's opportunity to make their points. Went through the history of the process Council went through, first with CR&R, the failure of the MRF in Perris, which was what the citizens wanted. With that option out, Council started all over again and decided to go with OK Associates. He sat in the negotiations, which was a big difference in what Chapter 6 of the contract offered. The biggest stumbling block was the $0.50 credit for the one day per week pick up, instead of two, with the recycling being the second pick up. OK Associates was not willing to give any more credit per month, for that one day per week, which was not realistic. The City wanted to know how OK Associates had arrived at that figure and OK Associates refused to disclose their books. When they refused to provide the real numbers used to determine the credit, that was when an impasse was reached. At that point, what else could the Council do. They were left with only an option with Hemet. Their offer was looked at, and after working on it for several weeks, felt it was a good deal. Hemet would 16 April 4, 1995 provide a good service and hoped the people would give them a chance to prove it. Council took the best option open at the time. Councilmember Leahy assured the public that as part of the program, Council would be monitoring the process with a three month and six month review, and no one would be overcharged. She too, endorsed privatization, and was, and still was, a strong supporter of OK Associates. When negotiating, they came to the table to discuss the issues, and a dispute caused a break down of communications, but she was faulting no one. It happened, and she did feel hurt and disappointed because of the hundreds of hours that had been spent on trash recycling. It seemed they would get so far, and then fall back, again and again. OK Associates gave certain options and Council was going to waive them if CR&R worked out. Then there were other options, which never worked out. The last option was to contract with Hemet. Council had looked at every option presented. She wanted to be able to say they would be recycling tomorrow, but that was not a reality. However, the state mandated the City charge and make reports, which Councilmembers would have to pay for also. Council did the best job it could with the situations they faced. The City to City agreement turned out to be the last and final option. She truly believed the City would benefit and not be a junior to Hemet. Wanted to dispel a lot of myths and undertones that prevailed, that Hemet could not be trusted. It was not their program coming to San Jacinto, it would be San Jacinto's own program and staff. Recommended that she and Mr. Oaks be a part of the committee to help monitor the program. Councilmember Williams appreciated those who were patient and waited to hear the Council. Regarding Mr. Jeglin's comments about truth and fairness, noted how important that was in the public forum, and just as important was the economical impact on the public. They had relied on OK Associates to always be truthful and fair in dealing with the Council and the community. A lot had been bandied about earlier in the evening about Council's truthfulness. Nothing that had been said, could have been further from the truth, than Mr. Jeglin's statements. In past meetings Council evaluated the City to City agreement and OK Associates proposals. The Reader's Digest version was, the proposals and rates charged were spread across the customer base and OK Associates deficit was $320,000, and in the worse case almost $400,000, based on their own budget and program. Council inquired, during a public meeting, if OK Associate could explain how they would deal with the deficit in the first year, because it simply did not make sense. Council inquired if they 17 April 4, 1995 would provide documentation to support the budgetary considerations and how they arrived at the numbers. That was not the first request, the same request had been made during private meetings to negotiate the issues. OK Associates position was, that information was private, and to date, have failed to provide the justification. Mr. Jeglin spoke of private books, talked of being publicly truthful and fair, yet holds that the books are private and proprietary and not open for the community to look at. Unfortunately, they would not come forward and provide documentation regarding spending for a program supported by public funds, citizens dollars, and unlike private enterprise, the City must be public. Council felt the information was warranted. It was an entirely different matter when spending tax dollars and providing a service to the public. Council would have to answer if the service provided, later claimed to need a raise in rates to meet the service needs. Council were presently comfortable with the figures, because in reality, OK Associates could not operate without a profit, and by their own documentation, could show no means of erasing the deficit by just efficiency, as they claimed. He supported private enterprise and agreed the City did not want to be in the trash business. Thought the residents should know that OK Associates had a seven year evergreen contract with a cost of living increase each year. Even if Council wanted to give notice, service would continue for another seven years, and they did not even need Council approval for a cost of living increase, nor would any justification be required, for the tax dollars of the citizens. The issue was, City funds would be expended, which was not an up front chunk of money, to provide for the program, and would be supported through the rates. The lease options were also paid from the rates collected. Council included 50% depreciation, so that in seven years, if equipment were needed, the funds would be available, which made more sense, and would provide in the event of an emergency, and provide for a reserve. In addition, the City was not purchasing equipment, but leasing, which was all a protection for the community. Wondered why some of the questions had not been asked before, since the Council had been talking about the issue for about three years. He applauded the public relations flyers and ads in the paper. However, perhaps, had Council had the input in the beginning, they could have had more input on the contract. The matter did not just pop up, there were committees and meetings and the City had gone to great lengths to involve the community. Finally, this was an unfunded mandate placed on the community by the state. No one had anything to say about the implementation. If the City did not comply there were heavy fines daily. Did not like the fact that the City had to pay, and it would be an ongoing 18 April 4, 1995 program. If the City had to have the fee, it should support a truthful program with no reliance on the general fund. Unlike the OK Associates proposal, did not see the need to come back each year for more funds. Was comfortable the proposal would provide the continuity for providing the program service to the community, without the need to come back and jab the community for more money. It had been an agonizing process and they were finally at a point to move forward, get the trucks on the road and put recycling behind. Mayor Pro Tem Solorio advised the hearing was to establish rates. He voted previously with the majority to support it and later as the minority to not vote for it. Felt one could get into a 3-4 day debate on the information. The City was tied by the OK Associates contract, as to where the City could go for recycling. After two years, they were limited. The issue was unfunded mandates, the ramifications of non compliance, this being just one of many unfunded mandates. OK Associates had a seven year evergreen contract, approved prior to the current Council. In terms of trash hauling, OK Associates was doing a good job, or they would not be with the City. Whether or not they could operate efficiently at the price quoted was unknown and Hemet already had somewhat of a program in recycling going. Unfortunately, private enterprise was not willing to negotiate, which was unknown to him. At the present point in the game, he had a strong suspicion Council would follow through, establish rates and go forth. Personally, win, lose or draw, he would personally do his best to make the program work. What everyone was present for could be argued all day and night. It had been hashed out many times before and he appreciated the concerns of citizens and their taking time to attend the meeting. It was sad that Council did not have their input at the onset of the issue, an issue which would have long lasting ramifications and come from the constituent's pocketbooks. It was a bad economy and a matter Council had to deal with. They had to run an orderly meeting, and so, had to advise the public, on occasion, to keep order. In the end, Council had always tried hard to be efficient and proficient with any program they had to deal with. People had to hear what they did not want to hear, and get what they expected not to get. A MOTION was made by Councilmember Leahy, seconded by Councilmember Oaks, to adopt Resolution No. 95-19, establishing rates for the collection of recyclable materials. Motion carried on a 3-1 vote with Mayor Pro Tem Solorio dissenting and one Council seat vacant. 19 RESOLUTION NO. 95-19 A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF SAN JACINTO, CALIFORNIA ESTABLISHING RATES FOR THE COLLECTION OF RECYCLABLE MATERIALS At the hour of 10:02 P.M. Council recessed. At the hour of 10:14 P.M. Council reconvened with all members present, except one Council seat vacant. 7.0 CITY DEPARTMENTS 7.1 San Jacinto & 7th Street Intersection Improvements - Change Order Request Public Works Director Evans made a presentation as contained in the staff report on file with the City Clerk. Stated the problems were engineering design rather than underground investigation. Some things were assumed on location regarding other utilities, which resulted in some conflicts. Virtually every utility was in the intersection. There were some delays for redesign work and then many months of negotiations on the responsibility for payment for delays, adding to the engineering costs. Staff offered a recommendation to Council to approve Change Order #4 for construction of the reinforced concrete squash box, and that Council approve half of Change Order #5, being the invoice related to delays and 1/3 of the engineering for redesign of the facility. In response to Council inquiries, advised when underground pipelines were designed, the design engineer, or client, had to make a decision whether to rely on utility company drawings, which were usually very good, but not good on depth. To make sure there were no mistakes during design, outlined alternative means of locating lines, all were at cost, and some less costly than others. In the present case, assumptions were made, which resulted in $5,000 or more in delays and $7,000 in additional engineering. His position was the engineer and engineering client made the decision, which did not turn out well. Therefore they should incur the cost. On the other side, they felt the City was obligated to share the cost since it was a joint project. Staff position was, if the engineer had potholed, they would have had to install a squash box anyhow, so thought Council could agree on only paying the squash box on Change Order #4 and nothing on the delays, or additional costs for redesign on Change Order #5. They agreed if he brought the matter to Council, they would proceed with the project and a Council decision would not cause any further delay. 20 April 4, 1995 A MOTION was made by Councilmember Williams, seconded by Councilmember Oaks, to authorize change order #4 in the amount of $5,727.47, and nothing on Change Order #5, for the San Jacinto and Seventh Street Intersection Improvement Project, to be charged to Storm Drain Account No. 39-4155-410-4001. Motion carried on a 4-0 vote with one Council Seat vacant. 7.2 Request for Input by Housing Authority of the County of Riverside Community Development Director McNabb made a presentation as contained in the staff report on file with the City Clerk. Councilmember Leahy, agreed not to support, but would like to take it one step further, and contact a local realtor to find an in fill housing and encourage those be bought, and keep a tab on that and not create a ghetto situation. Councilmember Oaks agreed it was inappropriate for Summerchase, which would depreciate rapidly and detract from the neighborhood. A MOTION was made by Councilmember Oaks, seconded by Councilmember Williams, to authorize the Mayor to send a letter to the Riverside County Housing Authority indicating the City was not supportive of their acquisition of homes in the Summerchase Homes for the purposes of creating rental units. Motion carried on a 4-0 vote with one Council seat vacant. 8.0 MAYOR/COUNCILMEMBER REPORTS/DISCUSSIONS City Manager Easter provided an update on the joint meeting with the Planning Commission, scheduled for May 8, 1995, from 8 AM to Noon. Staff had been unable to arrange for Mr. Freedman to date. Consensus that Council would be more desirous of postponing, briefly, until Mr. Freedman was available. Ms. Easter also made Council aware the JC Carnival, planned for the upcoming weekend, had not obtained the necessary permits and lacked the necessary inspections. Staff would continue efforts to contact them. They had not returned calls as of late that day. In response to Council inquiries, advised that normally the lead time for such an event was 30 days. 21 April 4, 1995 8.1 City Council Reorganization Mayor Pro Tem Solorio turned the meeting over to City Clerk Wilson. City Clerk Wilson opened nominations for Mayor. Councilmember Oaks nominated Councilmember Leahy, and provided background on her community service. Councilmember Williams nominated Councilmember Solorio. City Clerk Wilson, stating that nominations were closed, inquired how Council would like to vote. A MOTION was made by Councilmember Leahy, seconded by Councilmember Oaks, to conduct a voice vote. Motion carried on a 4-0 vote with one Council seat vacant. Motion was lost on a 2-2 vote, with Councilmembers Leahy and Oaks voting for Councilmember Leahy, and Councilmembers Solorio and Williams voting for Councilmember Solorio. Council consensus to open nominations again. Councilmember Williams nominated Councilmember Solorio. Councilmember Leahy nominated herself. By voice vote, Councilmember Solorio was selected Mayor on a 3-1 vote, with Councilmember Leahy dissenting. Mayor Solorio resumed as presiding officer for the meeting, and opened nominations for Mayor Pro Tem. Councilmember Williams nominated Councilmember Oaks. There being no further nominations, Mayor Solorio declared Councilmember Oaks Mayor Pro Tem by acclamation. 22 April 4, 1995 8.2 Naming of Public Facilities City Manager Easter reviewed the changes and noted the following addition to the first line, "establish guidelines and procedures to identify City owned facilities and events." Council comments: Amend further as follows: Page 2, Section A, make nominee plural in parenthesis. Page 2, Section B, add after committee "and/or City Council". Page 2, Section B, change number for Chamber Board and Community Preservation Committee to one each, and add /Director COUNCIL CONSENSUS to approve the policy as amended. 8.3 Chamber of Commerce Street Closure/Fee Waiver Cinco De Mayo Festival Community Development Director McNabb made a presentation as contained in the staff report on file with the City Clerk. In response to inquiry, Councilmember Oaks was advised that funds had been put in the budget under Community Promotions to grant such requests. Staff was not aware of any other requests for the year, and theoretically the JC Carnival could ask for a waiver. Councilmember Leahy stated there would be a shortfall from the budget. Since this was a fund raiser for the Chamber, suggested they could come up with the shortfall, rather than the City, and next year put aside enough to cover such in the City budget. City Manager Easter advised that Council had used the community promotions funds for a number of items. Suggested it would be appropriate for groups to make their requests for the 95/96 year, in time for Council consideration with the budget. The City may also receive request from the San Jacinto Business Association for the Potato Festival. Mayor Solorio thought, because of the possibility of other requests for community functions, it would not be unfair to request the Chamber to split the deficit. 23 April 4, 1995 Ms. Easter, in response to Council inquiry, advised staff already had next year's request from the Chamber. Councilmember Williams requested a policy for such requests for events, and similar activities related to economic development or economic related programs. Have them show the tangible benefits for the business community, or their efforts for business retention. He believed the activity attracted people to town, but would like to set up the funding in advance and avoid some of these type of issues. Mayor Solorio added he would like to see a packet of information with the requests and would like to hear from them on their fund raising programs. A MOTION was made by Councilmember Leahy, seconded by Councilmember Williams, to authorize the closure of Main Street between San Jacinto and Alessandro Avenues, and Sheriff and Jordan Avenues, immediately north and south of Main Street, from May 5, 1995 through May 7, 1995; and allocate funds from the Community Promotions fund, in an amount the Council deems appropriate, to cover City costs and fees associated with the Chamber of Commerce Cinco de Mayo event. Motion carried on a 4-0 vote with one Council seat vacant. Councilmember Williams, in responding to Mr. Padilla earlier, stated he would completely and absolutely denounce any support for youth joining gangs. He felt it was offensive to suggest. It was not enough that an individual would support a young adult joining a gang, there had been too much gang violence, and to suggest it was offensive and inappropriate. The community should provide opportunities for all youth, and not just the disadvantaged and wayward. Did not see them as leaders and it was a shame the meeting was used as a forum to promote that. Councilmember Leahy requested the issue of Warren Road be brought up again to see if there was anything that could be done to alleviate the problems. Wanted the matter agendized for reconsideration of solutions. Further, commented that Lake Park Drive would be open by Easter. She attended a meeting with a White House representative and the Office on Aging, to share issues. It was an opportunity to express concerns on the establishment of the certification process for senior only housing, to relieve the claims on age discrimination. On April 10, 1995, at the Valley Mall, they would be showing the playhouses built, and then they would be auctioned in May at the Galleria. April 22, 1995, was planned for College 24 April 4, 1995 Day. Finally, made a request to reconsider appointing another member to the Council. Felt she should have asked previously more about the ramifications of not appointing. Concerned there would be some critical issues coming to Council, and would want to avoid any possible tie votes. Suggested the matter be on the April 18th agenda, along with the actual appointment, in light of the April 20th deadline. Councilmember Oaks supported reconsideration of appointing to fill the vacancy. City Attorney Cox clarified the matter could be placed on the agenda, and it would take a unanimous consent of the Council for the actual reconsideration. City Manager Easter advised that Mr. Evans could provide an update on Warren Road at the April 18, 1995, meeting. Councilmember Leahy related an ironic story that she felt paralleled her four year and four months service on the Council. Although, it might have sounded like sour grapes, she was sorry the Council saw fit to take their action. Advised she would support the Council, as in the past, but they had truly done a disservice, in spite of the cited qualifications. Councilmember Williams was insulted, and felt it sounded as though the Council lacked the intelligence to understand the qualifications and background of the prospective candidates. The Mayor appointment was important. There was a need to support wholeheartedly, even if one did not agree with the decision made. Councilmember Leahy apologized if insulting, it was not intended to be. Councilmember Oaks stated the Recycling Committee still needed a representative. City Manager Easter clarified the agreement called for two members on the committee to monitor the program and provide staff feed back on franchise issues. As well, there were other subcommittees and representative positions to consider with the resignation of Mr. Hafliger. Council directed that appointments be placed on the agenda for the April 18, 1995, meeting. 25 April 4, 1995 At the hour of 11:00 P.M. Council recessed. At the hour of 11:15 P.M. Council reconvened for closed session, with all members present, except one Council seat vacant, and announced closed session pursuant to the following: 9.0 CLOSED SESSION 9.1 Conference with Legal Counsel - Existing Litigation pursuant to Government Code Section 54956 - California Resources Agency vs. City of San Jacinto 9.2 Conference with Legal Counsel - Existing Litigation pursuant to Government Code Section 54956 - California Farm Bureau vs. City of San Jacinto 9.3 Conference with Labor Negotiator Richard M. Kreisler, Regarding San Jacinto Police Officer's Association, San Jacinto Firefighters Association and Public Employees of Riverside County (PERC) Government code Section 54957.6 At the hour of 11:23 P.M. convened in open session with all members present, except one Council seat vacant, and announced no reportable action being taken. 10.0 ADJOURNMENT There being no further business to conduct, the meeting was adjourned. The hour of adjournment being 11:24 P.M. Submitted by Bob Wilson, City Clerk Deputy City Clerk 26 Approved David Solorio, Mayor osoNsomfti A N JACINTO Staff Report TO: Honorable Mayor and Members of the City Council FROM: Pamela L. Lee, Deputy City Clerk Via: Pamela S. Easter, City Manager DATE: May 2, 1995 RE: Minutes of Special Meeting of April 10, 1995 RECOMMENDATION: Approve the Minutes of the Special Meeting of April 10, 1995, as presented. MINUTES SPECIAL MEETING SAN JACINTO CITY COUNCIL AND THE CITY COUNCIL SITTING AS THE REDEVELOPMENT AGENCY AND INDUSTRIAL DEVELOPMENT AUTHORITY AND THE SAN JACINTO FINANCING AUTHORITY APRIL 10, 1995 1.0 CALL TO ORDER The special meeting of the San Jacinto City Council was called to order at 12:08 P.M. by Mayor Solorio at Mt. San Jacinto Community College, 1499 N. State Street, (Building 200, Board Room), San Jacinto, California. Present: Councilmembers Leahy, Oaks, Williams and Mayor Solorio Absent: Council Seat Vacant Pledge of Allegiance was led by Mayor Solorio 2.0 SPECIAL PRESENTATIONS None 3.0 PUBLIC COMMENTS None 4.0 REDEVELOPMENT AGENCY None 5.0 CONSENT CALENDAR - CITY COUNCIUREDEVELOPMENT AGENCY None 6.0 PUBLIC HEARINGS None 7.0 CITY DEPARTMENTS None 1 8.0 MAYOR/COUNCILMEMBER REPORTS/DISCUSSIONS 8.1 Reconsideration of Appointment of Council Vacancy, If Approved, Actual Appointment A MOTION was made by Councilmember Leahy, seconded by Councilmember Oaks, to reconsider an appointment to fill the vacancy created by the resignation of former Mayor Hafliger. Motion failed for a reconsideration on a 3-1 vote, with Councilmember Williams dissenting. City Attorney Cox clarified that Council rules called for a unanimous vote for reconsideration. Further discussion was at the discretion of the Mayor. Councilmember Oaks cited the following eight reasons for reconsidering the matter: 1. To preclude tie votes. 2. The Council functions were organized for five members. 3. Possibility of extra staff work. 4. Better ability to schedule vacations. 5. Ability to spread the various committee tasks, and Tess work for each Councilmember. 6. Tie votes look bad to the public and press. 7. A fifth member would make them more effective. 8. The legal complexity of interpreting 2-2 votes, by the City Attorney, or someone qualified. Some 2-2 votes would not be acceptable for adopting ordinances, resolutions for franchises and orders for payment. Other actions would require three affirmative votes, and urgency ordinances would require four votes. For those reasons he moved for a reconsideration. Councilmember Leahy noted that a time could come that one member might have a conflict of interest and Council would be limited to three eligible members, which could pose serious problems. A fifth member could serve the City just the same in that forum, due to the fact that Council had been looking at priorities and discussing where the City was going. It would be an advantage to come aboard quick and catch up. Supported a reconsideration. Mayor Solorio was concerned with the ambiguous guidelines governing a tie vote. It left him gasping for more answers. In either case, the particular reference to reconsiderations, the rules were just guidelines and maybe new rules could be established later on, but without unanimous consent, unless Councilmember Williams changed his opinion, the vote failed. 2 Councilmember Williams indicated he had not changed his mind from the first time the issue was considered. He felt this was something not to be taken lightly and had thought a lot about it. He appreciated the points that Councilmembers Oaks, Leahy and Solorio had made and were probably a primary consideration impacting his decision on not wanting to reconsider the action already taken to not fill the vacancy. For starters, the current Council configuration, they needed three for a majority vote, the same as would be needed with a full Council, so he did not see the complexity or dynamics of not being able to obtain a consensus to pass an issue. in looking at recent history, with controversial issues like recycling and NPDES, they still had three votes, and on one vote, he was on the short end of a two vote on a controversial issue with a five member Council. Even when a matter would be controversial, he still did not see that as being a hang up. Another thing, even more important, was that the process was forced at the present time. Because of the timing, they would be forced to make an appointment without the opportunity to interview, assuming the April 20th deadline. News articles pointed out that day, and identified one person who was suggested to be appointed, and one said candidates were already known to Council without a public forum. The process itself was a consideration. Comments had been made in the past, about a "Good Old Boys Network", for lack of a better term, which was nobody's fault. He was concerned with the outside perception that the appointment was a foregone conclusion. That was no reflection on the individuals abilities or character, simply on the process itself, which would appear to be tainted. Even if the end result would be the same, the appearance would be, lacking a full hearing, so to speak, not giving other candidates the opportunity to make their presence known and to be considered. He would like to see more talk about consensus and cooperation as a Council, rather than focus on the possibility of tie votes. Looking at the history, even when there were five members, 5-0 votes were very common, 4-1 votes common, and 3-2 votes less common. So even under the most controversial issues, Council had time and again agreed. This scenario would force a consensus and the need to focus and find solutions, where it might have been easier to rally a third party to a position. Ultimately it was his preference to let the voters make the decision in November. Felt there would be plenty of opportunity for Council to be successful without going back on the decision, and there were no new overwhelming considerations to prompt a change in position. Councilmember Oaks guessed that one point was that it could appear the process was tainted. He wasn't sure how it appeared, since each Councilmember could name their own selection for appointment and be open to vote for the most qualified. Did not agree along that point, and did not agree with going along for the next eight months agreeing on everything. There would 3 be sticky issues in the future, and although they disagreed infrequently, they did from time to time. It could put the Council in a bad situation and not productive. It served no purpose to maintain a Council of four, when it was designed for five. Councilmember Leahy stated that the appearance of no due process could be altered by the reminder of the recent process and advantage of the Planning Commission interviews, so they would not be picking out of the sky. If the concern was for consensus orientation, she hoped and prayed that would be the case. Agreed with Mr. Oaks, that there were some serious issues with funding and the availability of revenues and that would impact on citizens. Would not want to see, just for consensus sake, a changed vote. It would be a disservice to the people to change a vote just for a consensus, when one strongly believed in an issue. She could not do that, and hoped others felt that way as well. By having five on the Council it would preclude that from happening and they could come up with a majority vote. Questioned what would happen on a 2-2 vote and a motion failing for no majority, she could foresee arguments. Hoped that Mr. Williams would re-evaluate, because once the decision was made, the die was cast. She realized the Council had the opportunity several weeks ago, and she for one, regretted the action taken at that meeting, and was glad to have the opportunity to reconsider. Hoped the rest of Council would take the same advantage. Mayor Solorio reiterated the reconsideration failed for lack of a unanimous vote. At the hour of 12:25 P.M. Council recessed. At the hour of 12:30 P.M. Council reconvened with all members present, except one Council seat vacant. Mayor Solorio called for public comments, and there were none. Convened in closed session pursuant to the following: 9.0 CLOSED SESSION 9.1 Conference with Legal Counsel - Existing Litigation pursuant to Government Code Section 54956 - California Farm Bureau vs. City of San Jacinto 9.2 Conference with Legal Counsel - Existing Litigation pursuant to Government Code Section 54956 - California Resources Agency vs. City of San Jacinto 4 9.3 Conference with Legal Counsel - Anticipated Litigation, Significant Exposure to Litigation, Pursuant to Government Code Section 54956.9(b); 1 case At the hour of 12:38 P.M. convened in open session with all members present, except one Council seat vacant, and announced no reportable action being taken. 10.0 ADJOURNMENT There being no further business, the meeting was adjourned. The hour of adjournment being 12:39 P.M. Submitted by Bob Wilson, City Clerk Deputy City Clerk 5 Approved David Solorio, Mayor C C c A N JACINTO s 4DA 5.3 Staff Report TO: Honorable Mayor and Members of the City Council FROM: Laurie Mora, Deputy City Clerk Via: Pamela S. Easter, City Manager DATE: May 2, 1995 RE: Minutes of Special Meeting of April 17, 1995 RECOMMENDATION: Approve the Minutes of the Special Meeting of April 17, 1995, as presented. MINUTES SPECIAL MEETING SAN JACINTO CITY COUNCIL AND THE CITY COUNCIL SITTING AS THE REDEVELOPMENT AGENCY AND INDUSTRIAL DEVELOPMENT AUTHORITY AND THE SAN JACINTO FINANCING AUTHORITY APRIL 17, 1995 1.0 CALL TO ORDER The Special Meeting of the San Jacinto City Council was called to order at 5:30 P.M. by Mayor Solorio at the Palm Desert Civic Center, 73-510 Fred Waring Drive, Palm Desert, California. Present: Councilmembers Leahy, Oaks, Williams, Mayor Solorio Absent: Council Seat Vacant 2.0 SPECIAL PRESENTATIONS None 3.0 PUBLIC COMMENTS None 4.0 REDEVELOPMENT AGENCY None 5.0 CONSENT CALENDAR - CITY COUNCIL/REDEVELOPMENT AGENCY None 6.0 PUBLIC HEARINGS None 7.0 CITY DEPARTMENTS None 8.0 MAYOR/COUNCILMEMBER REPORTS/DISCUSSIONS 8.1 Mayor and Councilmembers' Summit Congressman Bono briefed the Mayor and Councilmembers on activities in Washington and received input from locally elected officials regarding current and upcoming issues. 9.0 CLOSED SESSION None 10.0 ADJOURNMENT There being no further business to conduct, the meeting was adjourned. The hour of adjournment being 7:30 P.M. Submitted by Bob Wilson, City Clerk Deputy City Clerk Approved David Solorio, Mayor 2 S STAFF REPORT TO: Mayor and City Council FROM Larry L. Weaver, Interim -Finance Director Via Pamela S. Easter, City Manager SUBJECT: Approval of Register of Audited Demands and Payroll Checks DATE: May 02, 1995 RECOMMENTDATION Approve warrant numbers 40245 through 40349 dated April 30, 1995 in the amount of $253,164.93 and Payroll check numbers 5060 through 5143 dated April 14, 1995. SUMMARY A listing of accounts payable warrants is attached for your review and approval. Payroll information is available for your review in the Finance Department. rREPARED 04/2.J.1995. JO:32100 City of Sa acInto 1 PROGRAM GM3130 ACCOUNTS PAYABLE UPDATE LIST REFORr NUMBER 25 GROUP NUMBER 1 00286 VOIDED CHECKS ACCOUNTING PERIODS 10/1995 OROUP USER nNNE RANSO TRANS DATE VOUCHER BK ACCOUNT NUMBER PROJ P.O. VENDOR VENDOR NAME INVOICE NUMBER DESCRIPTION A DFSCRIPTION 2 100 04/13/1995 004709 00 010-2500-425.36-25 VOID CHECK 200 04/13/1995 004710 00 010-1110-411.36-25 vOID CHECK 300 04/13/1995 vOID CHECK 004711 00 010-3210-431.30-90 COUNT.: AMOUNI: CROUP TOTALS 3 43'7.45- DUE DATE CHECK4 CHECK DATE TYPE LAST TRANS AMOUNT 0000566 HEMET NEWS SJ-006 102.45- 00/00/0000 0040060 03/20/1995 0000566 HEMET NEWS STMT. 2/0.00- 00/00/0000 0040060 03/31/1995 0001030 RIVERSIDE COUNTY RECORDER REO 65.00- 00/00/0000 0040139 03/31/1995 PREPARED 04/25/1995. 1013200 City of San Jacinto PAGE 2 PROGRAMI GM313U ACCOUNTS PAYABLE UPDATE LIST REPORT NUMBER 25 GROUP NUMBER ACCOUNTING PERIODT GROUP USER ANNE 00287 PREPAIDS 10/1995 TRANSO TRANS DATE VOUCHER DK ACCOUNT NUMBER DESCRIPTION 1. DESCRIPTION 2 100 04/17/1995 004712 NET PAYROLL 200 04/17/1995 004713 MEDIT UNION DEDUCTIONS 300 04/17/1995 004711 ACCOUNTING TECHNICIAN 400 04/17/1995 004715 ACCOUNTING lECHNICIAN 500 04/17/1995 004716 ACCOUNTING lECHNICIAN 600 04/17/1990 004717 ACCOUNTING IECHNICIAN 700 04/17/1995 004718 ACCOUNTING TECHNICIAN 800 04/17/1995 0047:1.9 ACCOUNTING TECHNICIAN 900 04/17/1995 004720 ACCOUNTING lECHNICIAN 1.000 04/17/1995 004721 ACCDUNIING TECHNICIAN 1100 04/17/1995 004722 ACCOUNIING TECHNICIAN 1200 04/17/1990 004723 ACCOUNTING TECHNICIAN 1300 04/17/1995 004724 REIMBURSEMENT -PURCHASE 1400 04/17/1995 004725 DEFERRED COMP DEDUCTIONS 1500 04/17/1995 004726 DEFERRED COMP DEDUCTIONS 00 005-0000-202.21-30 00 005-0000-202.21-41 00 019 4150-410.50-10 00 025 00 050-9000-450.50-10 00 055-4170-450.50-10 00 035-3100-431.50-10 00 036-3100-4731.50-10 00 03-3100-431.50-10 00 091-Q700-4-70.50-10 00 06-9700-470.50-10 00 099-9700-470.50-10 00 085-0000-202.21-33 CIF WEAPONS/POLICE DEPT. 00 005-0000-202.21-29 00 005-0000-202.21-29 PROJ P.O. VENDOR VENDOR NAME INVOICE NUMBER DUE DATE CHECKO CHECK DATE TYPE LAST TRANS 0000235 CITY OF SAN JACINTO RED 00/00/0000 0040245 04/30/1995 0000869 RIVERSIDE CO. EMPLOYEES STMT 00/00/0000 0040246 04/13/1995 0001068 RAY SOUZA RED 00/00/0000 0040247 04/14/1995 0001068 RAY BOUM REn 00/00/0000 0040247 04/14/1995 0001066 RAY DOUZA REO 00/00/0000 0040247 04/14/1995 0004068 RAY BOUZA REO 00/00/0000 0040247 04/14/1995 0001068 RAY SOUZA REO 00/00/0000 0040247 04/14/1995 0001068 RAY SOUZA REO 00/00/0000 0040247 04/14/1995 0001068 RAY SOUZA RED 00/00/0000 0040247 04/14/1995 0001068 RAY SOUZA RFO 00/00/0000 0040247 04/14/1995 0001068 RAY SOUZA REO 00/00/0000 0040247 04/14/1995 0001068 RAY DMZ() REG 00/00/0000 0040247 04/14/1995 0000235 CITY OF SAN JACINTO REO 00/00/0000 0040248 04/14/1995 0000691 LINCOLN. NATIONAL STMT 00/00/0000 0040249 04/14/1995 0000607 ICMA RETIREMENT TRUST STMT 00/00/0000 0040250 04/14/1995 AMOUNT 64.801.11 4.241 . 2 7 32 . 23 :52 . 23 322• 36 40.29 :15.23 '76.15 ::.!6.21 8.06 32.23 1 .A).1:17 1 .485.97 , 043.54 1,176.84 PREPARED 04/2. i99S. 10i32i00 PROGRAMS L3M3138 GROUP NUMDEF< ACCOUNTING PERIOD! GROUP USER ANNE 00287 FREPAID8 :L0/1995 TRANS.' TRANS DATE VI:II.ICHL:.R VI\ ACCOUNT NUMBER 1 EscRIP)IUN 1. DESCRIPTION 2 1600 04/24/1995 004641 REPLENISH POSTAGE: METER 1700 04/24/1995 004842 REPLENISH POSTAGE METER 1800 04/24/1995 00484:3 REPLENISH POSTAGE: METER 1900 04/24/1.995 004044 REPLENISH POSTAGE ME:'rER 2000 04/24/1995 004845 REPLENISH POSTAGE METER 2100 04/24/1995 004046 REPLENISH POSTAGE:: METER 2200 04/24/1995 004847 REPLENISH POSTAGE METER 2300 04/24/1995 0048413 RE::FL.E:N):S1-I POSTAGE ML::T'E:1': 2400 04/24/1995 004849 REPLENISH POSTAGE METER 2500 04/24/1995 004850 REPLENISH POSTAGE: METE 2600 04/24/1993 004851 KILLER BEES COURSE 2700 04/24/1995 004879 UNr.IERGOUNI) STORAGE: TANK 2800 04/25/1995 004600 PERS RETIREMENT 2900 04/25/1995 004081 HEALTH INSURANCE PREMIUM 3000 04/25/1995 004082 00 096-9700--470. 21--10 00 010--1700--417.21-10 00 010....2500--425.21--10 00 010-•3100--431.21-60 00 010-3200-431.21-10 00 010.-.33.00--471 . 21--10 00 010-41.50-•410.21-10 00 096-9700-470.21.--).0 00 050--9000-4` 0.2J.-10 00 010•-'7400--425.21-10 00 010-3200-431..31-20 FIFE DEPARTMENT 00 019--4150--410.21--70 FEE 00 095--0000-202.21--28 CONTRIBUTIONS 00 095-0000-202.21- 27 00 005-0000--202.21-39 00/00/0000 0040253 04/24/1995 00/00/0000 0040252 04/24/1995 0000369 U.S. POSTMASTER 00/00/0000 0040252 04/24/1995 0000369 U.S. POSTMASTER 00/00/0000 0040252 04/24/1995 0000369 U.S. POSTMASTER 00/00/0000 0040252 04/24/1995 0000369 U.S. POSTMASTER 00/00/0000 0040252 04/24/1995 0000369 U.S. POSTMASTER 00/00/0000 0040252 04/24/1995 00/00/0000 0040252 04/24/1995 0000369 U.S. POSTMASTER 00/00/0000 0040252 04/24/1995 00/00/0000 0040252 04/24/1995 00/00/0000 0040252 04/24/1995 City of Sa .canto ACCOUNTS PAYABLE ur'DATE LIST PRO_) P.O. VENDOR VENDOR NAME INVO):CE NUMBER DI11 DATE CHECK:' CHECK BATE TYPE LAST TRANS 0000369 U.S. POSTMASTER REG N 0000369 U.S. POSTMASTER RED N 0000369 U.S. POSTMASTER RED N REO N 0000369 U.S. POSTMASTER REO N RED N REO N REO N REG N RE:O N 0001860 CORONA F'OL.ICE DEPARTMENT REG N 0001226 STATE BOARB OF EOUALI-ZATI STMT 00/00/0000 0040254 04/24/1995 N 0000830 PERS 00/00/0000 0040256 04/24/1995 0000995 AFLAC 00/00/0000 0040257 04/24/1995 0000989 BLUE CROSS OF CA. HEALTH INSURANCE PREMIUM 00/00/0000 0040258 04/24/1995 REO N STMT N STMT N 3 REPORT NUMBER 25 AMOUNT 21:14.0'7 257.56 219.44 153.11 69.21 13.25 47.7E 11.57 3.21 20.60 60.00 37.77 14,669.80 1,050.14 3,312.00 PREPARED 04/25/1995. 10132t00 PROGRAM: GM313IJ GROUP NUMBER 00287 FREF'AIT.IS ACCOUNTING PERIODt 1.0/1995 GROUP USER ANNE 1 RANS4' TRANS DATE VOUCHER 1:DE:SCRIPTION 1 3100 04/25/1995 004083 DENTAL CARE/COBRA 3200 04/25/1995 004884 DENTAL CARE INSURANCE 3300 04/25/1995 00488., DENTAL CARE INSURANCE 3400 04/25/1995 004886 COBRA INSURANCE/FERRY 3500 04/25/1995 004887 COBRA INSURANCE/VRYHEID 3600 04/2.5/1990 004808 COBRA INSURANCE 3700 04/25/1995 004809 HEALTH INSURANCE PI FMIUM 3800 04/25/1.995 004890 i ..L-OS:CNG COSTS CUIJN'1' 1 AMUUN I' BK ACCOUNT NUMBER DESCRIPTION 2 00 065-0000-201.08-'64 MAX PERRY (>0 005....0000-202.21--3.1 1 00 085-0000--202.21--32 00 065--0000•-201.00--64 00 065-0000-201.08-64 .08-64 00 065.-0000--201.08-64 UESJARDINS 00 005-0000--202.21-39 00 099--9700--470.30-•90 fi.SCF:0W F 05334--24 GROUP TOTALS 38 1.19,987.50 City of San Jacinto ACCOUNTS PAYABLE UPDATE L.IST F'RO.J P.O. VENDOR VENDOR NAME INVO:TI::E NUMBER DUE DATE CFIECK CHECK DATE TYPE: I..AST TRANS 0000279 DENTI CARE OF CALIFORNIA STMT 00/00/0000 0040259 04/24/1995 N 0000279 DENTI CARE OF CALIFORNIA STMT 00/00/0000 0040259 04/24/1995 N 0000279 DENTI CARE OF CALIFORNIA STMT 00/00/0000 0040239 04/24/1995 N 0000969 AETNA HEALTH PLANS OF STMT 00/00/0000 0040260 04/25/1995 N 0000969 AETNA HEALTH PLANS OF STMT 00/00/0000 0040260 04/25/1995 N 0000969 AETNA HEALTH PLANS OF STMT 00/00/0000 0040260 04/25/1995 N 0000969 AETNA HEALTH FLANS OF STMT 00/00/0000 . 0040260 04/25/1995 N 0001249 CHICA00 TITLE RED 00/00/0000 0040261 04/25/1995 N PAGE 4 REPORT NUMBER 25 AMOUNT' 16.92 546.88 1.702.31 :L09.05 109.05- 378.10 2,571..05 1.,000.00 PREPARED 04/. 1995. 10: 3'2 : O0 PROGRAM: GM313U GROUP NUMBER 00288 ACCOUNTS PAYABLE ACCOIJNTING PERIOD; 1.0/1.995 GROUP USER ANNE 'i RANS4 TRANS I:DA IF° VOUCHER BK ACCOUNT NUMBER DESCRIPTION 1 DESCRIPTION 2 100 04/11/1995 004727 i FI1 IlAI.. CONTROL.. EQUIPMENT 200 04/.1.7/1995 004-720 SERVICE CALL TO REPAIR 300 04/17/1995 004729 ('ARTS 10 REPAIR 400 04/17/1995 004730 f FF:LCE SUPPLIES 500 04/17/199.5 004731 600 04/17/1995 004732 SAFETY BOOTS700 04/17/1995 004733 SAFETY ROWS JANITORIAL SUPPLIES 1300 04/17/1995 • IJtJOTS 900 04/17/1.995 SAFETY BOOTS 1000 04/17/1995 SAFETY BOOTS 1100 04/17/1995 SAFETY FOOTS 1200 04/17/1995 S AFETY BOOTS 1300 04/17/1995 SAFETY BOOTS 004734 004735 004736 004737 004730 004739 1400 04/17/1995 004740 OVERCHARGE ON SEWER 6 1500 04/17/1995 004741 NOZZLE FOR FUEL PLIt1F 00 010--3100-431..21-14 00 010-3200-431. 33-30 FIRE DEPT . WASHER 00 01 9...41 50--410.33-50 SKIPI. OADER 00 010-31.00--43.1.. 21--1.0 POLICE DEF'ARTME:NT 00 010-7400-425.21-•1.0 COMMi1JNITY CENTER 00 024-4150--410.21 ...35 PUBLIC) WORKS 00 024-4150--410.21.-35 PUBLIC WORKS 00 024-- 4150--4:1.0.21 •-35 PUFL.iC WORKS 00 024- 4150--410.2.L--35 PUBLIC WORKS 00 024--4150-4.1.0.21 -35 PUBLIC WORKS 00 050--9000--450.21-35 WATER DEPARTMENT 00 050--9000 -450.21--35 WATER DEPARTMENT 00 050-9000-450.21-35 (.CATER DEPARTMENT 00 055-41 7 0-450.36-95 REFUSE ACCOUNT 00 021--4150--410.34-50 City of Sa acInto ACCOUNTS PAYABLE UPDATE L.IST PROJ P.O. VENDOR VENDOR NAME INVOICE NUMBER DUE DATE CHECK; CHECK DATE TYPI- 1 AST TRANS 0001847 ANIMAL. CARE EOIJIPMF.:NT 951.300 04/30/1995 0000000 00/00/0000 N 0001.840 FESTWAY DISTRIBUTING CO. 1.4011.0 04/30/1995 0000000 00/00/0000 0000641 JOHNSON MACHINERY F'(7(:2:1.45770:3 04/30/1995 0000000 00/00/0000 N 0000883 RIVERSIDE.: COUNTY SUPPLY 105236 04/30/1995 0000000 00/00/0000 N 0000083 RIVERSIDE COUNTY SUPPLY 185:360 04/30/1995 0000000 00/00/0000 N 0001351 STIRDIVANTS SHOES 327 04/30/1995 0000000 00/00/0000 N 0001.351 STIRDIVANTS SHOES 323 04/30/1995 0000000 00/00/0000 N 0001.351 STIRDIVANTS SHOES 04/30/1995 0000000 00/00/0000 0001351 STIRUIVANTS SHOES 04/30/1995 0000000 00/00/0000 0001351 STIRDIVANTS SHOES 04/30/1995 0000000 00/00/0000 0001351 STIRDIVANTS SHOES 04/30/1995 0000000 00/00/0000 0001351 STIRDIVANTS SHOES 04/30/1.995 0000000 00/00/0000 0001351 STIRUIVANTS SHOES 04/30/1995 0000000 00/00/0000 329 N 330 N i' 4 N 320 N :32:1. N 731 N 0000916 SAN JACINTO UNIFIED SCI10O RE.(J 04/30/1995 0000000 00/00/0000 N 0000306 ELMER J. WOOD INC. 2106:3 04/30/1.995 0000000 00/00/0000 N REPORT NUMBER AMOUNT J 25 48.41 64.00 645.53 1..341.37 :39.03 100.00 100.00 :100.00 100.00 100.00 100.00 100.00 100.00 4.008.77 149.35 PREPARED 04/25/1995. 10:32100 City of San Jacinto PAGE 6 PROGRAM: GM313U ACCOUNTS PAYABLE UPDATE LIST REPORT NUMBER 25 GROUP NUMBER 1 00288 ACCOUNTG PAYABLE ACCOUNTING PERIOD: 10/1995 GROUP USER ANNE. TRANS:: TRANS DATE VOUCHER DK ACCOUNT NOMDER PROJ P.O. VENDOR VENDOR NAME INVOICE NUMBER DESCRIPTION 1 DESCRIPTION 2 DUE DATE CHECK-4 CHECK DATE TYPE: LAST 1 RANS 1600 04/17/1995 004742 00 02i-4150-410.34-50 0000306 ELMER J. WOOD INC. C21879 CORE RETURN 04/30/1995 0000000 00/00/0000 11 COUNT; AMOUNT: !ROM TUTALS 16 7.137.42 AMOUNT 39.04- PREPARED 04/-. i9915, 10:32100 F t:DORAN: GM313U GROI.IP NUMBER 1 00289 ACCOUNTS PAYABLE ACC(JIJNTING PERIODS :L0/1995 GROUT' USI:::R ANNE T'PANS4 I FANS I,ATI 1'I 0I' I. F•r1'ON 1 City of Sa aclnto ACCOUNTS PAYABLE UPDATE LIST VOUCHER BF. ACCOUNT NUMBER F'r<OJ P.O. VENDOR VENDOR NAME INVOICE NUMBER 100 04/17/1995 004 /43 POLYGRAPH EXAMS '00 04/177/1995 004744 CITY VELII.CI...E. WASHIc: 300 04/17/1995 004 /45 WATER/TRASH CONSUMER 400 04/17/1995 004746 WATER/TRASH CONSUMER 500 04/17/1995 004 747 WATER/ TRASH CONSIJMEF. 600 04/17/199U 004748 WATER/TRASH CONSUMER 700 04/17/1995 004749 WATER/TRASH CONSUMER 800 04/17/1995 004750 CITY WIDE STREE:'T 900 04/17/199S 004751 312 E. MAIN OFFICE LEASE. DESCRIPTION 2 00 010-1210-41.2.30--90 POLICE DEPARTMENT/RESERVE 00 019--3100--431..33-50 00 065--0000-229.08-67 DEPOSIT REIMBURSEMENT 00 065..-0000-229.08--67 DEPOSIT REIMBURSEMENT 00 065--0000--2 2 9.08-67 L:EPOSIT REIMBBL.1RSEMENT 00 06 ....0000'-'229 . A8-67 DE:F'OS:l:'r REIMBURSEMENT 00 065....0000-229. 0F.1--67 DEPOSIT REIMBURSEMENT 00 021-4150--410.34--05 SWEEPING 00 010--2500--425.34-05 1000 04/17/1995 004752 00 096.-9700--470.30--90 EVALUATION OF SETTLEMENT ALTERNATIVE/REL'1VLP. SLII'r 1100 04/17/1995 004703 00 010--3100-431.35-1.6 F'•I-IONE SERVICES 1.200 04/17/1995 004754 00 PHONE SERVICES 050.... 44:) 0-- 4 "50 .:35-1. 6 1300 04/17/1995 <)04755 00 037-3100-431.30-90 CONSULTING SERVICES C.F.I) -• 1400 04/1//1995 00471.6 00 042-9501--450.30-90 CONSULTING SERVICES A.D. 87-1 1500 04/1.7/1995 004757 00 043-8501-450.30•-•90 CCINSUL'I'INO SERVICESi A.G. 94-1 DOE DAM CHECKb CHECK DATE TYPE LAST TRANS 0000153 JOSEF'H G. BODNAR 04/30/1995 0000000 00/00/0000 0000216 CAR WASH DEPOT 04/30/1995 0000000 00/00/0000 0001042 FREI: CLARKE 04/30/1995 0000000 00/00/0000 0001843 MARY D. BELL 04/30/1995 0000000 00/00/0000 0001844 GEOROE STRAW.. 04/30/1995 0000000 00/00/0000 0001845 ILLEEN SPELL 04/30/1995 0000000 00/00/0000 0001846 HERMEL.INIIA OL..IVAS 04/30/1995 0000000 00/00/0000 0000984 R.F. DICKSON COMPANY 04/30/1995 0000000 00/00/0000 0000296 DIVINE REAL ESTATES 04/30/1995 0000000 00/00/0000 S1M'r N I N STMT N STMT N STMT M STMT STMT N 0:L004049 N RES N 0001299 ORC REDEV, CONSULTANTS, I STMT 04/30/1.995 0000000 00/00/0000 0000526 GENERAL. TELEPHONE CO. 04/30/1.995 0000000 00/00/0000 0000526 GENERAL.. TELEPHONE CO. 04/30/1995 0000000 00/00/0000 N STMT N $'EMT N RETORT NUMBER 2.5 6867 0001408 GOVERNMENT FINANCE GROUP 20526--:1.,2,20532 04/30/1.995 0000000 00/00/0000 N 6867 0001408 GOVERNMENT FINANCE GRI:IIJP 20526-.1.,2,20532 04/30/1.995 0000000 00/00/0000 N 0001408 GOVERNMENT FINANCE GROAT' 20526--1,2,20532 04/30/1995 0000000 00/00/0000 N , MOLIN1 400.00 63.00 11.55 1.4.78 1.1.55 11.55 5.20 7.296.25 1,1.50.92 554.25 131.38 28.74 409.27 186.84 186.83 PREPARED 04/'25/1.995. 10 i 32100 City of San Jacinto PAVE PRO(:3RAM1 GM3131J ACCOUNTS PAYABLE UPDATE I-.IST GROIJF' NUMBER 1 ACCOUNTING F'ERIODI GROUP USER ANNE 00209 ACCOUNTS PAYABLE 10/1995 1RANS4 TITANS DATE VOUCHER Di<K ACCOUNT NUMBER TIESCRIPTION 1 DESCRIPTION 2 1600 04/17/1995 004750 CONSULTING SERVICES 1 700 04/1 7/1995 004 759 CONSULTING SERVICES 1800 04/17/1995 004760 FILM PROCESSING 1900 04/17/1995 00476.1. WEED AIIATEMEN'F 00 046-0900-450.30-'90 C.F.LI. 02 00 044--0700-450.30-90 C.F.D. 01 00 010_.3100-431.30-1.5 MARCH :1.995 00 010•-3210-431..30-90 2000 04/17/1995 004762 00 010--321,0-431..30--90 WEED ABATEMENT 2100 04/17/1995 004763 00 W.IEEL.I ABA1 EME:NT 2200 04/17/1995 004764 TELEPHONE LEASE PURCHASE 2300 04/17/1995 004 765 1EI..EPHONE LEASE PURCHASE 2400 04/1.7/1995 004766 1 ELEPHONE LEASE PURCHASE 2500 04/17/1995 004767 TELEPHONE F'HONI LEASE: PURCHASE 2600 04/17/1995 004760 1 EI.-EPHONE LEASE PURCHASE 2700 04/1.7/1995 004769 1 ELEPHONE: LEASE PURCHASE: 2800 04/17/1995 004770 1ELEPHOWE LEASE PURCHASE 2900 04/17/1995 004771 REPAIR 10 FIREFIGHTER 3000 04/17/1995 004772 WINDOW REPLACEMENT 00 00 00 00 00 010-32.10- 431 .30--90 01. 0--2500- 425.35 -16 010--7400- 4 25.35-:1.6 010-2500-425.35-1.6 010 3100--431.35--16 014._ 4 7.00--410.35-]. h 00 05- 9000- 450. 35-J.6 00 055- 41.70 . 450.35 - 1. 6 00 010-3200-•431. 21.--35 CLOTHING 00 010.-4100--410.33--30 201 E. MAIN PRO -.I F.O. VENDOR VENDOR NAME INVOICE NUMBER DUE DATE CHECK CHECK DATE TYPE I...AST TRANS 6867 0001408 GOVERNMENT FINANCE GROUP 20526--1,2,20532 04/30/1995 0000000 00/00/0000 N 61367 0001.409 GOVERNMENT FINANCE GR0(.1P 20526- 1.,'2,20532 04/30/1995 0000000 00/00/0000 N 0000595 HOT SHOTS 1 HOUR PHOT❑ STMT 04/30/1995 0000000 00/00/0000 N 0000648 KARL E. BUCHWITZ, LIRA 04/30/1995 0000000 00/00/0000 0000648 KARL E. BUCHWITZ, LIRA 04/30/1.995 0000000 00/00/0000 0000640 KARL. E. BUCHWITZ-, LIRA 04/30/1995 0000000 00/00/0000 5TMT N 5TMT N ST'MT N 0000766 NTFC CAPITAL CORPORATION 95050352843 04/30/1995 0000000 00/00/0000 N 0000766 NTFC CAPITAL CORPORATION 95050352459 04/30/1995 0000000 00/00/0000 N 0000766 NTFC CAPITAL CORPORATION 95050352459 04/30/1995 0000000 00/00/0000 N 0000766 NTFC CAPITAL CORPORATION 95050352459 04/30/1995 0000000 00/00/0000 N 0000766 NTFC CAPITAL CORFORAT'CON 95050352459 04/30/1.995 0000000 00/00/0000 N 0000766 NTFC CAPITAL CORPORATION 95050:352459 04/30/1995 0000000 00/00/0000 N 0000766 NTFC CAPITAL CORPORATION 95050352459 04/30/1995 0000000 00/00/0000 0001560 RUFFIAN. SPECIALTIES 04/30/1995 0000000 00/00/0000 0000908 SAN JACINTO GLASS CO. 04/30/1995 0000000 00/00/0000 N 11.60 N 4121 N REPORT NUMBER AMOUNT 8 25 1,415.53 469.28 25.10 133.00 44'7.50 300.50 290.68 63.34 731.34 506.36 113.68 1:1.3.68 113.68 30.00 41'1.98 PREPARED 04/25.1995. 103200 City of Sal acInto 9 PROGRAM: 0M313U ACCOUNTS PAYABLE UPDATE LIST REPORT NUMBER 25 GROUP NUMBER 4 00289 ACCOUNTS PAYABLE ACCOUNTING PERIOD: 10/1995 GROUP USER ANNE TAN;4 TRANS DAIF4 VOUCHER DK ACCOUNT NUMBER DTSCRIPITON 1 DESC.:RIFTION 2 3100 04/17/1995 004/73 00 010-6100-425.34-05 CURATOR SERVICES APR 1:1.../MAY JIJNE 1.995 3200 04/17/1995 004774 00 025-7254-410.35-14 UTILITIES 3300 04/17/1995 UTILITIES 004775 00 025-7256-410.35-14 3400 04/17/1995 004776 00 02':, 7260-410.35-14 UTILITIES 3500 04/17/1995 00477e 00 096-9700-470.21-10 SUPPLIES -ECONOMIC DEVLP 3600 04/17/1995 004170 00 096-9700-470.30-90 REDEVELOPMENT ATTORNEY CON'S' 11T ANT 1,-1 3700 04/i7/1995 004779 00 099-9700-470.30-90 FENCE INSTALLAIIVIN COUNI1 AMOUNT: 04/30/1995 0000000 00/00/0000 04/30/1995 0000000 00/00/0000 PROJ P.O. VENDOR VENDOR NAME INVOICE NUMBER DUE DAVE CHECK- CHECK DATE TYPE LAST IRANS 0000910 SAN JACINTO MUSEUM ASSOC:. REP N 0000447 SO. CALIFORNIA EDISON CO. STMT N 0000447 SO. CALIFORNIA EDISON CO. STMT 04/30/1995 0000000 00/00/0000 0000447 SO. CALIFORNIA EDISON CO. STMT 04/30/1995 0000000 00/00/0000 0001166 STATER BROS 04/30/1995 0000000 00/00/0000 1.21.46 N 7049 0000412 STRADLING, YOCCA. CAM nnN STMT 04/30/1995 0000000 00/00/0000 0001565 SUPERIOR MCCOY SANITATION 166 REDEVLF. HOUSING PROPERTY 04/30/1995 0000000 00/00/0000 SROUP TOTALS 37 25 . '556 . 64 AMOUNT 1,475.00 151.66 42.00 1,709.41 10.04 6.063.11 659.00 PREPARED 04/25/1995. '1.0:32:00 PROGRAM: GM 313U GROUP NUMBER ACCOUNTING F'E_RIOLIL GROUP USES ANNE 00291 ACCOUNTS PAYABLE. i0/1995 T'RANSO TRANS LATE. VOUCHER DK ACCOUNT NUMBER DESCRIPTION 1. DESCRIPTION 2 1.00 04/18/1995 004700 COMPUTER: 11:L.E: SERVER 200 04/1.0/1.995 004781. COMPUTER FILE SERVER 300 04/10/1995 004?IL1 SAFETY lAL.Is. ; •1" I.I81...1:t::• TT.ON 400 04/10/1995 004 703 NAME PLATES & NAME_ TAGS 500 04/10/1995 004704 SMEDI(::AL_ WASTE REMOVAL. .00 04/1.8/1995 00478L:. FIFE .. SUPPLIES 700 04/10/1995 004706 PIPE d SUPPLIES 000 04/18/1995 00478 i PIPE . SUPPLIES 900 04/18/1995 004700 FINGERPRINT APPLICATIONS 1000 04/10/1995 (104 7F39 TOWING CHARGES-NARC (IN1:T 1100 04/10/1995 004790 FRUFES';:F.CINAL.. SERVICES 1200 04/18/1995 004791 PRESSURE STRIP•-L..3. NE 1300 04/10/1995 004792 PSYCHOLOGICAL EXAM 1.400 04/16/1995 004793 OOF'HER PROGRAM AM 1500 04/18/1995 004 794 OATH STREET RESERVOIR 00 010- .L 1:i.0- 411. 2:1.--10 00 Olt) i700.-.41 7.21.-.L0 00 050 9000•--4: A . 21.....10 WATER DET AFTMF:NT 00 0.1.0 :i,.L00-41. L .21-1.0 00 010-31 00-43:1..34--05 POLICE DEPARTMENT 00 025--7100--410.21- 1i10 PARKS DEPARTMENT 00 050--9000-450.21-35 NATER DEPARTMENT 00 050--9000--450.33--30 NATEF• DEPARTMENT TMENT 00 010-- i. 210-41 2.30--90 POLILF 17EPARTMI5NT 00 0.L0.., i100...4751..34--:I 1 F'fll-.li:F DEPARTMENT 00 019 -.:3100...43:1 .21-74 CITY AUCTION City of San .Jacinto ACCOUNTS PAYABLE UPDATE LIST F'F(O.3 P.O. VENDOR VENDOR NAME INVOICE NUMBER DUE DAIF: CHECK0 CHECK DATE TYF'E. LAST TRANS 00 050 -9000-450.21-.10 PR IN ER/WATER LII!.:F'AI T'F11 NI 00 010-121 0- 4 1 2 .30 _.90 RESERVE: OFFICER 00 025-7256--410.34-05 RANCHO SAN ..JACINTO 00 051--9000-450.40-••01 COATING INSPECTION 0001049 AFC 04/30/1.995 0000000 (>0/00/0000. 0001.849 AFC 04/30/1995 0000000 00/00/0000 0001300 BONOARDE COMM. 04/30/1.995 0000000 00/00/0000 0000997 ANAI1Y'S TROPFIIE:S 04/30/1.995 0000000 00/00/0000 RE::O N REO N T<EO 1'1 1714 N 0001541. BFI MEDICAL. WASTE SYSTEMS 950300--01.19420 04/30/1995 0000000 00/00/0000 N 0000985 B & W PIPE & SIJPFI...Y STMT 04/30/1995 0000000 00/00/0000 M 0000985 B h W PIPE A SUPPLY STMT 04/30/1995 0000000 00/00/0000 N 0000985 B & W PIPE & SUPPLY STMT 04/30/1995 0000000 00/00/0000 N 0001182 STATE OF CALIFORNIA 974356 04/30/1995 0000000 00/00/0000 N 0000218 CASTEI...LANO' S TOWING SERV. . 2058:3 04/30/1995 0000000 00/00/0000 N 0001354 PEIIRO CASTILLO REIT 04/30/1.995 0000000 00/00/0000 N 0001.850 CHA RIii:IT 04/30/1.995 0000000 00/00/0000 N 0000249 THE COUNSELING TEAM STMT 04/30/1995 0000000 00/00/0000 N 7323 0000263 D & J LANDSCAPE & MAINTEN 10305 04/30/1.995 0000000 00/00/0000 N 0001656 JOHN EGAN h ACCDSCIATFS 19233 04/30/1995 0000000 00/00/0000 N PAGE REPORT NUMBER AMOUNT 10 25 235.99 236.00 233.50 25.86 35.90 124.22 26.55 10.40 72.00 25.00 176.94 32.44 1.60.00 300.00 543.90 PREPARED 04/2,- ..995. :(0:32:(>0 PROGRAM: GM3131J f3f(I:IUP NUMBER t 00291 ACCOUNTS PAYABLE ACCOUNTING PERI:OD1 1.0/.1.995 )RO11P USER ANNE TRANS. TRANS DAM. VOI.ICI-IF:R DK ACCOUNT NUMBER DESCRIF'I.ICN I. DESCRIPTION 1600 04/18/1995 004795 00 01.0•-2500--425.35--16 .TONE SET:VICES 1700 04/18/1995 004796 00 025--7216-410.35....1.6 PHONE SERVICES 1800 04/18/1995 004797 00 010-3100-431.35-16 PHONE SERVICES 1900 04/10/1995 00479a 00 050-9000-450.33-'30 '1 E:*T CHEMICALS F OF( WATER t .uALITY City of Se', .canto .' ACCOUNTS PAYABLE L/Y'DATE LIST REPORT NUMBER PROJ P.O. VENDOR VENDOR NAME INVOICE NLIMBEF< D(1R: DATE CHECK: CHECK DATE TYPE I...AST TRANS 2000 04/18/1995 004799 00 050-9000-450.30-90 SEI:VICES-RENTAL MARKET VALUE: OF INDUSTRIAL. BLDG. 2100 04/18/1995 004000 00 021.-4150 410.30-90 ASPHALT DEBRIS REMOVED MOM LAKE F'A.F(K DRIVE: 2200 04/10/1995 00480.1. 00 010-3200-431.33-30 (OXYGEN --FIFE DEPARTMENT 2300 04/10/19955 004002 00 010--3200-431..21--10 FILM DEVELOI'=:ING EIRE DEPARTMENT 2400 04/18/1.995 004003 00 010-2500-425.34--05 MAINTENANCE -LINE PRINTER 2500 04/18/1975 004E104 00 055.....11.70-450.33--30 MAINTENANCE: --LINE F'RIIJTEI< 2600 04/18/1995 004805 00 050-9000-450.33--30 MAINTENANCE -LINE PRINTER 2700 04/18/1995 004806 00 021--4150--410.30-90 LIES1.ON SERVICES -ROUTE 79 ACROSS FAN ..IACINTO RIVER 2800 04/1.8/1990 004007 00 010-0000-304.03--35 REFUND OF DIS11If3SED PARKING CITATION 2900 04/18/1995 0040013 00 019-3100-431.21-74 AL.ICTIONEER CERVICES FOR CITY AUCTION 3000 04/18/1995 004809 00 010-3100-431.21-85 JUF'PL'IES-EVIDENCE CRIME SCENES 0000526 GENERAL TELEPHONE CO. 04/30/1995 0000000 00/00/0000 0000526 GENERAL- TELEPHONE CO. 04/30/1995 0000000 00/00/0000 0000526 GENERAL TELEPHONE CO. 04/30/1995 0000000 00/00/0000 0000545 HACH COMPANY 04/30/1995 0000000 00/00/0000 0001851 DAVID G. HALE 04/30/1.995 0000000 00/00/0000 SEMI N STMT N ¶ITMT N 8.1.91306 N STMT N 0001609 HEMACINTO r(ECYcLI:NG MATER :3645 04/30/1995 0000000 00/00/0000 N 0001852 HOMEDCD 04/30/1995 0000000 00/00/0000 :L80090241 N 0000595 HOT SHOTS 1 HOUR PHOTO STMT 04/30/1995 0000000 00/00/0000 N 0000605 I.B.M. CORP. 04/30/1995 0000000 00/00/0000 0000605 I.H.M. CORP. 04/30/1995 0000000 00/00/0000 0000605 I.S.M. CORP. 04/30/1995 0000000 00/00/0000 45CO201 N 45E020:L N 45E0201 N 0000649 ROBERT KAHN, JOFIN RAIN 39278 04/30/1995 0000000 00/00/0000 0001.853 MAURINE KIHLMAN 04/30/1995 0000000 00/00/0000 N RED N 0001854 KOZMA APPRAISAL & AUCTION REO 04/30/1995 0000000 00/00/0000 N 0000690 LIGHTNING POWDER 04/30/1995 0000000 00/00/0000 103269 N AMOUNT' 11 25 25.87 28.73 44.1.3 135.'53 250.00 625.00 37.50 63.90 :L31.64 47.08 59.84 500.75 35.00 4,235.85 18.00 PREPARED 04/25/1995. 10f32i00 City of San Jacinto PROGRAMS GM313U ACCOUNTS PAYABLE UPDATE LIST GROUP NUMBER ACCOUNTING PERIOD! GROUP USER ANNE 00291 ACCOUNTS PAYABLE 10/1995 TRANS= TRANS DATE VOUCHER t:1'. ACCOUNT NUMBER CDESCRIPTION 1 DESCRIPTION 2 3100 04/10/1995 004810 POSTAGE -SHIPMENT OP RADAR :3200 04/10/1995 00401.1 ESPLANADE AVENUE 3300 04/10/1995 004812 SiiOEOBA VILLAGE L.AGE 3400 04/10/1995 004813 TRASH CONTAINERS 3500 04/18/1995 004814 REFUND OF DEVELOPMENT 3600 04/10/1995 00481% REFUND OF DEVELOPMENT :3700 04/18/1995 004816 REFUND OF DEVELOPMENT 3800 04/18/1995 004817 REFUND OF DEVELOPMENT 3900 04/10/1995 004010 FIRE EXTINGUISHER SERVICE. 4000 04/10/1995 00481 SERVICE P.L. MOT'ORCYCL.(r. 4100 04/18/1995 004820 STREET SWEEPING 4200 04/18/1995 00402:1. RANCHO SAN .JAC.IN'FO:! 4300 04/18/1995 004822 MAINTENANCE OF PARKS 4400 04/113/1995 004023 F'LIJMBING SUPPLIES 4500 04/18/1995 004824 F'L.LIMBINO SUPPLIES 00 010-3100-431.. 21-60 UNITS 00 096- 9700--470.40--01. J. i'IPRUr!ENE NTS 00 043-0501-40.40-01. IMPROVEMENTS 00 099--9700--470.34--05 FIRST ST. CLEAN--IJP 00 067- 0000--308.OB-65 FEES-737 W. MAIN 00 067-0000-3001.00-65 FEES--737 W. MAIN 00 010-0000-300.06-01 FEES--737 W. MAIN 00 010--0000--308.06--01 FEES--737 W. MAIN 00 010-3200-431.21.--80 FIRE DEPARTMENT 00 019--3100-431..33- 50 1 00 021-4150--410.34--05 MAIN STREET t. DOWNTOWN 00 025-7256--410.34--05 IRRIGATION 00 025-..71.00--410. 34- 05 00 024--4150-410.21.--80 PUBLIC WORKS 00 050-•9000-450.33-30 WATER DEPARTMENT 04/30/1995 0000000 00/00/0000 04/30/1995 0000000 00/00/0000 04/30/1995 0000000 00/00/0000 04/30/1995 0000000 00/00/0000 04/30/1995 0000000 00/00/0000 04/30/1.995 0000000 00/00/0000 04/30/1995 0000000 00/00/0000 04/30/1.995 0000000 00/00/0000 04/30/1995 0000000 00/00/0000 04/30/1995 0000000 00/00/0000 04/30/1995 0000000 00/00/0000 04/30/1.995 0000000 00/00/0000 PROJ P.O. VENDOR VENDOR NAME INVOICE NUMBER DUE DATE CHECK* CHECK GATE TYPE LAST TRANS 0000707 MAIL. PLUS MORE 10377 04/30/1995 0000000 00/00/0000 7338 0001357 NOTTSON CONSTRUCTION :! 04/30/1995 0000000 00/00/0000 N 7147 0001357 NOTTSON CONSTRUCTION 4 04/30/1995 0000000 00/00/0000 0000770 O.K. ASSOC. INC. STMT N 0000780 OVERNIGHT INDUSTRIAL.. REO N 0000780 OVERNIGHT INDUSTRIAL. RE(:1 N 0000780 OVERNIGHT INDUSTRIAL.. REO N 0000780 OVERNIGHT INDI.IST'RIAI... F<EG N 0000785 PACIFIC A-1 FIRE EOUIFMEN 50935 N 0000793 P.S. HARI..EY-DAVIDSoN 3787 N 0000806 PHOENIX PROGRAM INC. STMT N 0000006 PHOENIX PROGRAM INC. STMT N 7329 0000006 PHOENIX PROGRAM INC. STMT N 0000007 LARRY FIERCE PLUMBING STMT N 0000807 LARRY PIERCE PLUMBING STMT N REPORT NUMBER AMOUNT PAGE 12 25 14.50 21,997.61 4:1,436.90 510.46 68.99 466.11 137.99 41.3.99 166.50 5115.45 345.00 1,153.95 815.00 4.72 47.10 PREPARED 04/2... 1995. 10132:00 CIty of Sa JcInto F _ 13 PROGRAMI 6113130 ACCOUNTS PAYABLE UPDATE LIST REPORT NUMBER 25 GROUP NUMBER 1 00291 ACCOUNTS PAYABLE ACOOUNTINO PERIOD1 10/1995 GROUP USER ANNE 1RANS4 1RANS DAIE VOUCHER DK ACCOUNT NUMDER OESCRIP1fON 1. DESCRIPTION 2 4600 04/18/1995 004(325 00 010-3100-431.34-05 ANIMAL :IMPOUNDS 4700 04/18/1995 004826 CHILDREN SERVICES 4800 04/10/1995 00482/ DISPArcHERs couRsE 4900 04/10/1995 004820 MILEAOE 61 MEAL 5000 04/18/1995 004629 COUNCIL & DEPARIMENT 5100 04/10/1995 004030 ANNUAL RECORDATION NOTICE 5200 04/18/1995 004831 TRAINING -WATER DEPARTMENT 5300 04/18/1995 004032 OPORADE ELECTRIC MOTOR 5400 04/18/1995 004833 TRW PROPERTY DATA CHECK 5500 04/18/1995 004834 1RW PROPERTY DATA CHECK 5600 04/18/1995 004835 TRANSCRIPTION CONTRACT 5700 04/18/1995 004836 WARREN ROAD 5800 04/18/1995 004037 EMERGENCY REPAIR TO 5900 04/10/1995 004038 GRAFFITI REMOVAL 6000 04/18/1995 004039 LANDSCAPE MAIN1UNANCE 00 010-3100-431.21-60 DIRECTORY-POIJCE DEPT. 00 010-3100-431.31-25 Pall REIMBURSABLE 00 010-1100-411.31-20 REIMBURSEMENT 00 010-2500-425.21-10 HEAD RETREAT 00 050-9000-450.33-30 WATER DEPARTMENT 00 050-9000-450.30-90 00 050-9000-450.30-90 WATER DEPARTMENT 00 010-3210-431.30-90 00 010-3210-431.30-90 00 0L2-3100-431.34-05 POLICE DEPARTMENT 00 022-4150-410.40-01 REHABILITATION PROJECT 00 050-9000-450.33-30 WELL MOTOR 00 025-7260-410.34-05 00 025-7100-410.34-05 HOFMANN PARK 04/30/1995 0000000 00/00/0000 0000360 VALLEY ELECTRIC 04/30/1995 0000000 00/00/0000 PROJ P.O. VENDOR VENDOR NAME INVOICE NUMBER DUE DATE CHECKCHECK DATE TYPE LAST TRANS 0000845 RAMONA ANIMAL HAVEN 04/30/1995 0000000 00/00/0000 0001745 RESOURCE DIRECTORY 04/30/1995 0000000 00/00/0000 STMT N RED N 0001315 SAN DIEGO MIRAMAR COLLEGE 4:1.43 04/30/1995 0000000 00/00/0000 0001839 DAVID SOI ORIO 04/30/1995 0000000 00/00/0000 0001166 STATER BROS 04/30/1995 0000000 00/00/0000 0000424 STATE WATER RESOURCES 04/30/1995 0000000 00/00/0000 0000406 TAABS 04/30/1995 0000000 00/00/0000 TRW N 121410 N REO N 91171. N 0001419 TOWNE & FAIRWAY GOLFCARS 941.982 04/30/1995 0000000 00/00/0000 0001.294 TRW REDI PROPERTY DATA 04/30/1995 0000000 00/00/0000 0001294 TRW REDI PROPERTY DATA 04/30/1995 0000000 00/00/0000 N 1.592E174 N 1. t'i94403 N 71.62 0001.617 THE TRANSCRIPTION FRFSCRT 1015 04/30/1995 0000000 00/00/0000 7294 0000368 JAMES W. UNLAND & ASSOC. 14471 N 4207 N 0000354 VALLEY TEEN FOUNDATION 280 04/30/1995 0000000 00/00/0000 0000350 VALLEY RESOURCE 04/30/1995 0000000 00/00/0000 N 5531 N AMOUNT 674.00 4.00 52.00 60.38 27.02 20.00 300.00 134.69 20.00 100.00 3.425.81 2,614.60 5.157.70 301.'75 60.00 PREPARED 04/2:5/1993. 10:32:00 City of San Jacinto PAGE 14 PROGRAM: 6143131J ACCOUNTS PAYABLE UPDATE LIST REPORT NUMDER 25 GROUP NUMBER : 0029/ ACCOUNTS PAYABLE ACCOUNTING PERIOD: 10/1995 GROUP USER ANNE TRANS- fRANS DATE VOUCHER Flk ACCOUNT NUMBER PROJ P•0. VENDOR VENDOR NAME INVOICE NUMBER DESCRIPTION 1 DESCRIPTION 2 DUE DATE CHECK t CHECK DATE TYPE 1. AST TRANS AMOUNT 6100 04/10/199ti 004040 00 025-7J00-410.34-05 0000350 VALLEY RESOURCE 5529 450.00 LANDSCAPE MAINTENANCE HOFMANN PARK 04/30/1995 0000000 00/00/0000 nR01.11,' .ITI FAL S MUM; 61 AMOUNT: 90,05.70 PREPARED 04/a. .1995. 10:32:00 PROOF(AI11 611313IJ GRI:)L1P NUMBER ACCOUNTING PERIOD' GROUP USER ANNE. TRANS 4 1I2ANS DAT DEscRTrifom :I 00292 ACCOUNTS PAYABLE 10/1995 V011ia-IER DF ACCOUNT NUMBER DESCRIPTION 2 100 04/24/1995 004052 CALIBRATION OF TI u(::;.. 200 04/24/1995 004053 TaA(';TERi:r'd.. ANAI._Y6.F5 300 04/24/1995 001051 I<AC TE:F(FAL, ANALYSIS 400 04/24/1995 004855 BACTERIAL ANALYSIS 500 04/24/1995 004056 TOWING SERVICES -UNIT a,309 600 04/24/1995 004057 REIMBURSE WATER/TRASH 700 04/24/1995 004050 REIMBURSE: WATER/TRASH 600 04/24/1995 004059 RE1:ME41RSE: WATER/1RASF1 900 04/24/1995 004060 REIMBURSE wATER/TRA5II 1000 01/24/1995 004661 REIMBURSE WATER/TRAsI1 1100 04/24/1995 004062 INDIVIDUAL 1'-'SYCHO I'I-IEERAF"( 1200 04/24/1995 004E63 UTILITIES 1.300 04/24/1995 004064 TRUSTEE SERVICES 1400 04/24/1995 004865 PHONE SERV J:CEb 1500 04/24/1995 004866 PHONE SERVICES 00 024-4150--410.33--30 SCALES 00 050-9000...450.33-30 RATER DEPARTMENT 00 050--9000- 450.3:.i .30 WATER DEPARTMENT 00 050--9000 4 50.33-30 WATER DEPARTMENT 00 019.-•9000-450.21.--72 WATER DEPARTMENT 00 065--0000--229.01I»67 CONSUMER DEPCSI:T 00 065- 0000--2 2 9.08-67 CONSUMER DEPOSIT 00 065--0000- 2_ 9. 08--67 CONSUMER DEPOSI:'T 00 065--0000--229.06 -67 CONSUMER DEFCISIT 00 065--0000-229.00--.67 CONSUMER DEPOSIT 00 040-1210-412.30.90 00 025--7253--410.35-1.0 00 042--0 501--450.30-90 A.D. 07 •-'1. 00 (> 10- 2500- 425.35-..16 00 010--6100-425.35--1.6 04/30/1995 0000000 00/00/0000 04/30/1995 0000000 00/00/0000 04/30/1995 0000000 00/00/0000 04/30/1995 0000000 00/00/0000 04/30/1995 0000000 00/00/0000 04/30/1995 0000000 00/00/0000 04/30/1995 0000000 00/00/0000 04/30/1995 0000000 00/00/0000 04/30/1995 0000000 (>0/00/0000 04/30/1.995 0000000 00/00/0000 04/30/1.995 0000000 00/00/0000 04/30/1995 0000000 00/00/0000 04/30/1.995 0000000 00/00/0000 04/30/1.995 0000000 00/00/0000 City of Se .clnto ._ 15 ACCOUNTS PAYABLE urDATE LIST PROJ P.O. VENDOR VENDOR NAME INVOICE NUMBER I>uE: DATE CHECK4 CHECK DATE TYPE I. AST TRANS 0001862 ASCO 04/30/1995 0000000 00/00/0000 7276 N 0000949 F.S. BABCOCK & SONS 20549 N 0000949 E.G. BABCOCK & SON'_; 20364 N 0000949 E.S. BABCOCK & SONS 20713 N 0000210 CASTEL_L..ANOtS TOWING SEEN. 2045E N 0001055 TRACY E. SCHMII:DT STMT N 0001656 MARTHA ELVIA VALEN7_LIEL..A STMT N 0001057 RICHARD I..ADIJISE STMT N 0001858 ROBERT S. SWAIN STMT N 0001859 CARL. L_LJCHETTA STMT N 0000249 THE COUNSELING TEAM STMT N 0000460 EASTERN MLINI .WATER DI ST . ::n M 1' N 0000504 FIRST INTERSTATE. BANK 07174 N 0000526 GENERAL. TELEPHONE CO. STMT. N 0000526 GENERAL TELEPHONE CO. STMT. N REPORT NUMBER AMO1JN1 65.00 .30.00 50.00 30.00 45.00 .1.2.77 10.56 20.52 3.93 1:1.55 255.00 7.36 2,692.62 26.30 37.42 PREPARED 04/25/1995. 10:32:00 City of San Jacinto PROGRAM: C3M31311 ACCOUNTS PAYABLE UPDATE L..IST REPORT NUMBER GROUP NUMBER ACCOUNTING PERIODI GROUP USER ANNE 00292 ACCOUNTS PAYABLE: 10/1995 TRANS. TRANS DATE. VOUCHER BK DESCRIPTION 1 DESCRIPTION 2 1600 04/24/1995 004667 LEGAL. ADVERTISING 1700 04/24/1995 004666 00 021-4150-410.33-30 COLD MIX PIJBI_IC WORKS 1.E100 04/24/1.995 004869 00 021.--4150-•410.33--30 COLD MIX N.JO-IC WORKS 1900 04/24/1995 004870 00 (>10-3210-431.30--90 WEED ABATEMENT 2000 04/24/1995 004871. 00 050--9000--450.33-30 WATER SUPPLIES 00 010-1700-47.7.36-25 2100 04/24/1995 004072 00 010-7400--425.35-1.6 LONG DISTANCE SERVICES 2200 04/24/1995 004873 00 010-3200-431.35-16 LONG DISTANCE SERVICES 2300 04/24/1995 0040/4 00 010-3100-431..35--16 I..I:1NG DISTANCE SERVICES 2400 04/24/1995 004875 00 010-3100-431.34-05 RENTAL- OF MOBILE OFFICES POLICE DEPARTMENT 2500 04/24/1995 0040%6 00 0 I.O..-1,2:LO._41.2. 30-90 PRE -EMPLOYMENT PHYSICALS 2600 04/24/1995 0040/7 00 025-7260--410.34-05 GRAFFITI REMOVAL. 2700 04/24/1995 004070 00 01.0-1400-444.34--05 INTERIM --FINANCE DIRECTOR 2800 04/25/1995 (>04891 00 010--1400-41.4.34-05 INTERIM FINANCE DIRECTOR GOON!: AMOUNT: GROUP 'TOTALS 28 10.860.04 ACCOUNT NUMBER PROJ P.O. VENDOR VENDOR NAME INVOICE.. NUMBER DUE DATE CHECKS arm DATE TYPE: LAST TRANS 0000566 HEMET NEWS 04/30/1995 0000000 00/00/0000 0000612 INDUSTRIAL ASPHALT 04/30/1995 0000000 00/00/0000 0000612 INDUSTRIAL ASPHALT 04/30/1995 0000000 00/00/0000 0000648 KARL E. DUCIJWITZ. DBA 04/30/1995 0000000 00/00/0000 0000710 MARDEN-SIISCO 04/30/1995 0000000 00/00/0000 STMT. N 532329 N 532:323 N STMT N 460177 N 0001080 MCI TELECOMMUNICATIONS 397706 04/30/1995 0000000 00/00/0000 N 0001080 MCI TEL..ECOMMUNICATIONS 3977(38 04/30/1995 0000000 00/00/0000 N 0001.080 MCI TELECOMMUNICATIONS :391788 04/30/1995 0000000 00/00/0000 N 0000922 SCOTSMAN MANUFACTURING CO CPX--03679-04--95 04/30/1995 0000000 00/00/0000 0001.492 US FAMILY CARE/HEME:T (>4/30/1995 0000000 00/00/0000 N STMT N 0000354 VALLEY TEEN FOUNDATION 262 04/30/1995 0000000 00/00/0000 0001831 LARRY WEAVER 04/30/1995 0000000 00/00/0000 0001831 I-.ARRY WEAVER 04/30/1995 0000000 00/00/0000 N STMT N STMT N AMOUNT PAGE 16 25 207.90 220.26 258.48 3'17.25 663.74 .51 7.59 5.29 943.64 875.00 161.50 2.127.50 :1.,761.35 TO: Honorable Mayor and Councilmembers FROM: Rod Butler, Assistant to the City Manager via: Pamela S. Easter, City Manager DATE: May 2, 1995 RE: DESIGNATION OF PRINCIPAL AND ALTERNATE STAFF REPRESENTATIVES TO THE COACHELLA VALLEY JOINT POWERS INSURANCE AUTHORITY Recommendation Designate Interim Finance Director Larry Weaver as the primary San Jacinto representative and Assistant to the City Manager Rod Butler as the alternate San Jacinto representative to the Coachella Valley Joint Powers Insurance Authority Board of Directors. Background The City of San Jacinto is a member of the Coachella Valley Joint Powers Insurance Authority and currently participates in the CVJPIA's liability and worker's compensation insurance programs. This joint powers organization is governed by a Board of Directors consisting of the 26 member agencies. Each member agency designates a primary representative to serve as its voting member on the Board of Directors. Until her departure in March, former Finance Director Anna Vega was San Jacinto's primary representative. Since that time Larry Weaver and Rod Butler have shared the responsibility of attending CVJPIA meetings and corresponding with the agency's staff on current issues. Until the permanent Finance Director is hired in July, staff recommends that Interim Finance Director Larry Weaver be appointed as San Jacinto's representative on the CVJPIA Board of Directors and that Assistant to the City Manager Rod Butler be appointed as the alternate representative. ." 3 A N 'JACINTO Au�.JDA 5. to Staff Report TO: Honorable Mayor and Councilmembers FROM: Les Evans, Director of Public Works DATE: May 2, 1995 RE: ADOPTION OF RESOLUTION NO. 95- INITIATING THE FISCAL YEAR 1995-96 ANNUAL UPDATE OF LANDSCAPING, LIGHTING, AND PARK DISTRICT NO. 1 Recommendation: Adoption of Resolution No. 95- Initiating the Fiscal Year 1995-96 Annual Update of Landscaping, Lighting and Park District No. 1. Fiscal Impact: The initiating of proceedings itself has no fiscal impact. However, at future meetings, the City Council will be asked to establish property assessments for street lighting, park maintenance and landscape maintenance which will generate approximately $600,000. No increase in assessments are proposed for 1995-96. Background: The City has formed assessment districts for street lighting, park maintenance and landscape maintenance. In order to continue these programs, the City is required to prepare an engineering report, hold a public hearing, and establish assessments for each district. The first step in the process is adoption of a resolution directing the engineer to prepare reports. (Also on this agenda is Council consideration of the selection of an assessment engineer). The next step in the formation of Districts will include approving the Preliminary Engineering Report and proposed assessments and setting a Public Hearing. This second step is scheduled for June 6, 1995. The Public Hearing will take place at the first Council meeting in July, with the Council being asked to adopt the 1995-96 rates at the close of the Public Hearing. 0 RESOLUTION NO. 95- A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF SAN JACINTO, CALIFORNIA INITIATING PROCEEDINGS FOR THE 1995-96 FISCAL YEAR ANNUAL UPDATE OF LANDSCAPING, LIGHTING AND PARK DISTRICT NO. 1; PURSUANT TO THE LANDSCAPING AND LIGHTING ACT OF 1972 The City Council of the City of San Jacinto, California, does hereby resolve as follows: Section 1. The City Council is considering and, therefore, proposes to update Landscaping, Lighting and Park District No. 1 for Fiscal Year 1995-96, pursuant to the Landscaping and Lighting Act of 1972 (Section 22500 and following, Streets and Highways Code) for the purpose of the following improvements: Maintaining and servicing street lighting, street trees, parkways, median islands, and city parks; and graffiti removal. There are no proposed new improvements or substantial changes of existing improvements since the 1994-95 annual update of this District. This assessment district includes the land within the city limits of the City of San Jacinto, as shown by map on file with the City Clerk of the City of San Jacinto. Section 2. The City Council hereby directs the engineer to prepare and file with the City Clerk a report in accordance with Article 4 of Chapter 1 of the Landscaping and Lighting Act of 1972. Berryman and Henigar is hereby designated engineer for the purpose of these proceedings. Section 3. The Mayor shall sign this Resolution and the City Clerk shall attest and certify to the passage and adoption thereof. Page Two Resolution No. 95- May 2, 1995 MOVED, PASSED AND ADOPTED this day of , 1995 by the following vote: AYES: NOES: ABSTAIN: ABSENT: Mayor Deputy City Clerk CERTIFICATION The foregoing is certified to be a true copy of Resolution No. 95- duly adopted by the said City Council of the City of San Jacinto on the date set forth therein. Deputy City Clerk S A N JAC I NTO TO: Honorable Mayor and Councilmembers FROM: Les Evans, Director of Public Works via Pamela S. Easter DATE: May 2, 1995 SUBJECT: ,-L.pafil .� Staff Report CONTRACT FOR SERVICES WITH BERRYMAN & HENIGAR FOR ASSESSMENT ENGINEERING SERVICES Recommendation: Approve the Contract for Services with Berryman and Henigar for Lighting, Landscaping and Maintenance Assessment Engineering Services and authorize the Mayor to execute the Agreement on behalf of the City. Background: For the past three years, the City has contracted with GFB-Friedrichs of Riverside to provide Assessment Engineering Services for the City's Street Lighting, Landscape and Park Maintenance Districts. This year, City staff requested proposals for these services. Requests for Proposal were sent to three firms who specialize in Assessment District services. Two of the three firms submitted proposals. The firms who submitted proposals are: Qualifications Location Fee Berryman & Henigar Excellent San Diego $11,950 GFB-Friedrichs Excellent Riverside $16,500 Willdan Engineering, of San Bernardino, did not submit a proposal. Staff Report/Contract for Services May 2, 1995 Page Two Out of pocket expenses (i.e. xeroxing, mileage, etc.) are included in the submitted above -mentioned fees. However, the City will be required to pay some miscellaneous costs, including purchase of County computerized assessors' listing and production of City maps. Although GFB-Friedrichs has provided excellent service over the past three years, the fee proposed by Berryman and Henigar, as well as their excellent qualifications, have given them an advantage over GFB this year. Staff recommends that Berryman and Henigar perform the Assessment Engineering Services for 1995-96 Street Lighting, Landscape and Park Maintenance District. The cost of the Assessment Engineering services is budgeted in Account 25. CONTRACT FOR SERVICES This Agreement is made on , between THE CITY OF SAN JACINTO ("Client"), with a principal place of business at 312 E. Main Street, San Jacinto, CA 92583 and Berryman & Henigar, Inc. ("Contractor"), an independent contractor, with a principal place of business at 11590 W. Bernardo Court, Suite 100, San Diego, CA 92127. ARTICLE 1. TERM OF CONTRACT 1.01. This agreement will become effective on the date stated above and will continue in effect until terminated as provided in this agreement. ARTICLE 2. SERVICES TO BE PERFORMED BY CONTRACTOR 2.01. Contractor agrees to perform the services specified in the Scope of Services, attached to this agreement as Exhibit "A" incorporated into this agreement by reference. Method of Performing Services 2.02. Contractor will determine the method, details, and means of performing the above -described services and in accordance with the Scope of Services, prepared and presented by Contractor and attached hereto. Status of Contractor 2.03. Contractor enters into this agreement, and will remain throughout the term of the agreement, as an independent contractor. Contractor agrees that he is not and will not become an employee, partner, agent, or principal of Client while this agreement is in effect. Contractor agrees that he is not entitled to the rights or benefits afforded to Client's employees, including disability or unemployment insurance, workers' compensation, medical insurance, sick leave, or any other employment benefit. Contractor is responsible for providing, at his own expense, disability, unemployment, and other insurance, workers' compensation, training, permits, and licenses for himself and for his employees and subcontractors. -1- Conflict of Interest 2.04 Contractor warrants that it has no interest as would constitute a conflict of interest under City's Resolution No. 2226, adopted pursuant to the Political Reform Act of 1974, and will comply with any applicable provision of said Resolution. Payment of Income Taxes 2.05 Contractor is responsible for paying when due all income taxes, including estimated taxes, incurred as a result of the compensation paid by Client to Contractor for services under this Agreement. On request, Contractor will provide Client with proof of timely payment. Contractor agrees to indemnify Client for any claims, costs, losses, fees, penalties, interest, or damages suffered by Client resulting from Contractor's failure to comply with this provision. Use of Employees or Subcontractors 2.06 Contractor may, at Contractor's own expense, use any employees or subcontractors as Contractor deems necessary to perform the services required of Contractor by this Agreement. Client may not control, direct, or supervise Contractor's employees or subcontractors in the performance of those services. ARTICLE 3. COMPENSATION 3.01 In consideration for the services performed by Contractor, Client agrees to pay to Contractor $11,950.00. Payment of Compensation 3.02 Contractor shall bill monthly for fees incurred and costs so expended in such previous month. City shall pay such billed amounts within 45 days after billing, unless City shall dispute any portion of said billing, in which case, the undisputed portion shall be paid. Any unresolved billing disputes shall be submitted for decision in accordance with Section 8.04 of this Agreement. ARTICLE 4. OBLIGATIONS OF CONTRACTOR Non -Exclusive Relationship 4.01 Contractor may represent, perform services for, and contract with as many additional clients, persons, or companies as Contractor, in his sole discretion, sees fit. -2- Time and Place of Performing Work 4.02 Contractor may perform the services under this agreement at any suitable time and location he chooses and in accordance with the Scope of Services prepared by the Contractor and attached to this Agreement. Tools, Materials and Equipment 4.03 Contractor will supply all tools, materials, and equipment required to perform the services under this Agreement. Workers' Compensation 4.04 Contractor agrees to provide workers' compensation insurance for Contractor's employees and agents and agrees to hold harmless and indemnify Client for any and all claims arising out of any injury, disability, or death of any of Contractor's employees or agents. Liability Insurance 4.05 Contractor agrees to maintain policies of insurance in the minimum aggregate amount of $1,000,000 to cover any negligent acts or omissions (including owned and non -owned automobile liability coverage) committed by Contractor or Contractor's employees or agents during the performance of any duties under this agreement. Contractor shall further maintain Errors and Omissions coverage for professional negligence in the minimum amount of $1,000,000. Contractor's Qualification 4.06 Contractor represents that he has the qualifications and skills necessary to perform the services under this Agreement in a competent, professional manner, without the advice or direction of Client. This means Contractor is able to fulfill the requirements of this Agreement. Failure to perform all the services under this Agreement constitutes a material breach of the Agreement. Contractor has complete and sole discretion for the manner in which the work under this Agreement will be performed. -3- Indemnity 4.07 Contractor agrees to indemnify and hold Client free and harmless from all losses, costs, expenses, obligations, liabilities, damages, recoveries, and deficiencies, including interest, penalties, attorneys' fees, and costs, that Client may incur as a result of a breach by Contractor of any representation or agreement contained in this Agreement, and from any negligent act or omission of Contractor, its agents, employees or subcontractors, resulting in the death or injury of any person or persons (including employees of Contractor), or in the damage or destruction of any property or properties, caused by or connected with negligent acts, errors and omissions during the performance of this Agreement by Contractor or Contractor's agents, employees or subcontractors. Assignment 4.08 Neither this Agreement not any duties or obligations under this Agreement may be assigned by Contractor without the prior written consent of Client. ARTICLE 5. OBLIGATIONS OF CLIENT Cooperation of Client 5.01 Client agrees to comply with all reasonable requests of Contractor and provide access to all documents reasonably necessary to the performance of Contractor's duties under this Agreement. Ownership of Plans 5.02 The Client acknowledges the Contractor's construction documents as instruments of professional service. Nevertheless, the plans and specifications prepared under this Agreement shall become the property of the Client upon completion of the work and payment in full of all monies due to the Contractor. The Client shall not reuse or make any modification to the plans and specifications without the prior written authorization of the Contractor. The Client agrees, to the fullest extent permitted by law, to indemnify the hold the Contractor harmless from any claim liability or costs (including reasonable attorneys' fees and defense costs) arising or allegedly arising out of any unauthorized reuse or modification of the construction documents by the Client of any person or entity that acquires or obtains the plans and specifications from or through the Client without the written authorization of the Contractor. -4- ARTICLE 6. TERMINATION OF AGREEMENT Termination on Notice 6.01 Notwithstanding any other provision of this Agreement, City may (and Contractor may, subject to the liability for actual damages incurred to City for completion of contractor work) terminate this Agreement at any time by giving ten (10) days written notice to Contractor. Unless otherwise terminated as provided in this Agreement, this Agreement will continue in force until the services provided for in this Agreement have been fully and completely performed. Should the contract to be so terminated, Contractor shall be entitled to payment of the reasonable value of services completed to the date of termination. Termination on Occurrence of Stated Events 6.02 Without any compromise of Client's right to seek damages permitted by law, this Agreement will terminate automatically on the occurrence of any of the following events: (a) Bankruptcy or insolvency of contractor (b) Sale of the business of contractor (c) Assignment of this Agreement by contractor without the consent of the client Termination for Default 6.03 If either party defaults in the performance of this Agreement or materially breaches any of its provisions, the non -breaching party may terminate this agreement by giving written notification to the breaching party. Termination will take effect immediately on receipt of notice by the breaching party or five days after mailing of notice, whichever occurs first. For the purposes of this paragraph, material breach of this Agreement includes, but is not limited to, the following: (a) Contractor's failure to complete the services specified in the Description of Services (b) Contractor's material breach of any representation or agreement contained in Paragraph 4.07 (c) Client's material breach of any representation or agreement contained in this Agreement -5- ARTICLE 7. GENERAL PROVISIONS Notices 7.01 Any notices required to be given under this Agreement by either party to the other may be effected by personal delivery in writing or by mail, registered or certified, postage prepaid with return receipt requested. Mailed notices must be addressed to the parties at the addresses appearing in the introductory paragraph of this Agreement, but each party may change the address by giving written notice in accordance with this paragraph. Notices delivered personally will be deemed communicated as of actual receipt; mailed notices will be deemed communicated as of the day of receipt or the fifth day after mailing, whichever occurs first. Entire Agreement of the Parties 7.02 This Agreement supersedes any and all agreements, either oral or written, between the parties with respect to the rendering of those services. Each party to this Agreement acknowledges that no representations, inducements, promises, or agreements, orally or otherwise, have been made by any party, or anyone acting on behalf of any party, which are not contained in this Agreement, and that no other agreement, statement, or promise not contained in this Agreement will be valid or binding. Any modification of this Agreement will be effective only if it is in writing signed by the party to be charged. Partial Invalidity 7.03 If any provision of this Agreement is held by a court of competent jurisdiction to be invalid, void, or unenforceable, the remaining provisions will continue in full force and effect without being impaired or invalidated in any way. Arbitration 7.04 Any controversy between the parties to this Agreement involving the construction or application of any of the terms, covenants, or conditions of this Agreement will, on the written request of one party served on the other, be submitted to arbitration. The arbitration will comply with and be governed by the provisions of the California Arbitration Act, Sections 1280 through 1294.2 of the California Code of Civil Procedure. The parties will each appoint one person to hear and determine the dispute. If those two persons are unable to agree, then they will select a third impartial arbitrator whose decision will be final and conclusive on both parties. The cost of arbitration will be borne in a proportion the arbitrators determine. -6- Attorneys' Fees 7.05 If any legal action based in contract law, including an action for declaratory relief, is brought to enforce or interpret the provisions of this Agreement, the prevailing party will be entitled to reasonable attorney's fees, which may be set by the court in the same action or in a separate action brought for that purpose, in addition to any other relief to which that party may be entitled. Governing Law 7.06 This Agreement will be governed by and construed in accordance with the laws of the State of California. Executed at San Jacinto, California, on by: by: by: by: CLIENT THE CITY OF SAN JACINTO CONTRACTOR c (1 t- .c,. FDA • STAFF REPORT TO: Honorable Mayor and City Council Members wr-- FROM: Brian McNabb, Director of Community Development via Pamela S. Easter, City Manager DATE: May 2, 1995 SUBJECT: FEE DEFERRAL PROGRAM RECOMMENDATION Staff recommends that the City Council introduce the attached Ordinance, waive the reading of the Ordinance in full and read by title only, thereby extending the interim development fee waiver/deferral program to June 30, 1996. BACKGROUND On April 18, 1995, the City Council directed Staff to prepare an Ordinance to extend the program that waived certain development related fees and deferred others. The program, established by Ordinance No. 1000, sunsets on June 30, 1995. The purpose of the program was to stimulate development, which had threatened to come to a halt. The program waives development related non -general fund fees and defers certain general fund fees to either close of escrow (single family residential) or certificate of occupancy (commercial/industrial). The only change to the program is the re -instatement of the Park Fee, which would be assessed at close of escrow. Due to expenditures from the Park Fund for various projects, this fund is nearly depleted. CCRPT-95\FEE WAVER. RPT ORDINANCE NO. AN ORDINANCE OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF SAN JACINTO, CALIFORNIA, EXTENDING TO JUNE 30, 1996, THE INTERIM FEE AND PAYMENT POLICY SCHEDULE FOR SINGLE FAMILY RESIDENTIAL AND COMMERCIAL/INDUSTRIAL DEVELOPMENT ESTABLISHED BY ORDINANCE NO. 1000, WHICH EXPIRED ON JUNE 30, 1995 RECITALS WHEREAS, the City continues to recognize that the economic downturn has severely impacted the single family residential and commercial/industrial development community, reducing construction activity and resulting in lost wages and jobs for our citizens. WHEREAS, the City is committed to providing a high quality of life for our citizens, by maintaining or creating job opportunities, increasing the affordable housing stock and improving services. WHEREAS, reducing the financial impact on the single family residential and the commercial/industrial development community during this economic downturn may stimulate construction activity and thereby create additional job opportunities, housing opportunities and improve services for our citizens. WHEREAS, the interim fee waiver and fee deferral payment policy will reduce the financial impact on the single family residential and commercial/industrial development community. THEREFORE, THE CITY COUNCIL DOES HEREBY ORDAIN THAT: SECTION 1. The interim fee waiver and payment policy for single family residential and commercial/industrial development is hereby established subject to Exhibits "A" and "B," attached hereto and included herein. SECTION 2. The interim fee waiver and payment policy shall only apply to those final maps and building permits that are issued for the time period commencing on the effective date of this ordinance and sunsetting at the end of the 1995-1996 Fiscal Year, June 30, 1996. In the case of final maps approved during this time frame, implementing building permits issued after June 30, 1996, will be subject to all development fees normally required. 1 SECTION 3. This ordinance will take effect thirty (30) days from the passage thereof. SECTION 4. The City Clerk shall certify to the adoption of this ordinance and cause the same to be published in a newspaper of general circulation printed and published in the County of Riverside, State of California. Introduced at a special meeting of said City Council on the 2nd day of May 1995. MOVED, PASSED AND ADOPTED at a regular meeting of the City Council on the day of , 1995, by the following vote. AYES: NOES: ABSENT: Mayor ATTEST Deputy City Clerk CERTIFICATE STATE OF CALIFORNIA, COUNTY OF RIVERSIDE, CITY OF SAN JACINTO, I hereby certify that the foregoing is a true copy of Ordinance No. _ duly adopted by the City Council of the City of San Jacinto at a regular meeting thereof held the _ day of , 1995. WITNESS my hand and official seal of the City of San Jacinto this day of Deputy City Clerk 2 EXHIBIT "A" INTERIM FEE WAIVER AND PAYMENT POLICY EXPIRING JUNE 30, 1996 The following fees shall be paid subject to the following: 1. Payable at Final Map approval, prior to recordation: Tentative Map Application Fee Final Map Application Fee 2. Payable at building permit issuance: Flood Control Improvement Fee 3. Payable at either close of escrow (sfr) or final occupancy issuance (comm/ind), as applicable to the type of development: Water Capital Improvement Fee Fire Station Mitigation Fee Building Permit Surcharge Current Planning Fee Advance Planning Fee Fire Sprinklers Inspection Fee Park Fee 4. Payable at request for water meter, where water meter does not exist or is being replaced: Water Meter Fee All remaining City Development Fees, as depicted on Exhibit "B", for Single Family Residential and Commercial/Industrial development shall be waived until the end of the 1995/1996 Fiscal Year, June 30, 1996. This Ordinance has no effect on plan check, building permit, and/or application/review fees not expressly indicated herein or on Exhibit "B". EXHIBIT "8" 07 :577.10PMEr.7 TEES mug-== 1991 'Regional _=ansportat_tn 5 520.00 per acre Local =ranstortat_on Puni.c Buildings 500.00 oer acre e5.00 oer acre :loop Control Improvement Area =1 Area --2 5990.00 oer acre 4975.00 per acre v Traffic Sicnai_zat_c.. SF Units MF Units Subdivision Ccrx!er:_a1 150.00 per dwelling unit 100.00 per dwelling unit 2700.00 per acre :700.00 per acre Carpool Mitigation Fee Water Capital Imp Fee Residential Commer:_a1 90.00 per dwelling unit 250.00 per dwelling unit 200.00 per 15 PFU City Sewer Fee Residential Commer:_al Public Safety Struct_res Residential commercial Public Safety Equipment Residential Commerg_dl Park Fee SF Detached SF Attacned 2-4 Units 5+ Units Monilenomes Undercrounding Fee Street Trees 200.00 per dwelling unit 200.00 per 50.00 per dwelling unit 0.01 per square foot of lot area 10.00 per dwelling unit 0.01 per square foot of lot area 525.24 314.46 460.62 402.48 290.52 per dwelling unit per dwelling unit per dwelling unit per dwelling unit per dwelling unit 50.00 per linear foot 250.00 per tree Building Permit Surcnarge1Min. Total Permit ,Max. 550.00 Fire Station Mit Fee Residential Commercial Current Planning Residential commercial Advanced ?fanning_ Residential Commercial Lignt_nc, Landscaping. Maintenance :_Et. Fire Hydrant Paint S Blue --t N/A /nsfa/W. bti Il ✓'l AIM Vn. »-/liI 67 c)v y- 577.00 per dwelling unit 0.34 per square feet of building 50.00 per dwelling unit elda 0.02 per square foot of gae4area 15C.00 per dwelling unit Bepia 0.06 per square foot of Earearea 1.00 per ._near foot 200.00 minimum up to four 50.00 fcr each additional Fire Eprinkle+s .1.00 - .50 per need per dwelling unit Water Meters 3/4" 400.00 eacn 500.00 eacr. 750.00 each 1000.00 eacr iv per Fees: Eastern dater 7istr_ct - 7reaccent ?'-ant Fees Call "co-1522 �- �n.z.ec Scnoo..:.st-•--s - 5cnooi. FeesCall ==4_2=35 SanHemet ac - Call TO: FROM: Honorable Mayor and Members of the City Council Gene Price, Interim Fire Chief via Pamela S. Easter DATE: May 2, 1995 P444 1. A 1..* RE: Fire Department Altematives RECOMMENDATION: 1) Give direction to staff on how to proceed. 1. 2) Approve specified service level in draft Request for proposal. BACKGROUND: The City of San Jacinto has been considering alte ative means of Fire Suppression Services for the last couple of years. (This had not included services provided by the Fire Prevention division.) The discussions began when the Fire Chiefs of Hemet and San Jacinto were directed, by their respective Ci Councils, to'begin exploring the possibility of consolidating both departments to improve services and reduce costs. In „ August of 1993, the City of San Jacinto requested a proposal from the Riverside County A Fire Department, with a cost estimate from them to provide contract. Fire Services for the City. Consideration continue, to be given to p9thiiossiOilities and in February of 1994, Fire Chief Ross Chadwick gave a report to the City Counci outlining the advantages and disadvantages,of both alternatives, consolida ing with Hemet, or contracting with the Riverside dOaitTFire Department. In April of 1994, Chief Chadwick resigned to accept employment with another agency. In September of 1994, I requested and received a revised proposal from the Riverside County Fire Department The revised proposal was requested because of some changes that have occurred in the Fire Department The changes included the resignation of the Fire Chief, elimination of the apprentice program, and the implementation of the defibrillator (EMT-D) program. 2 Since that time I have analyzed the following available options: 1. Continue to operate as a City of San Jacinto Fire Department 2. Consolidate the City of Hemet Fire Department with the San Jacinto Fire Department 3. Contract with the County of Riverside to provide Fire Protection services. Each option has been compared using the same level of service. An analysis of the three options are listed below. Continue to operate as the San Jacinto Fire Department. The San Jacinto Fire Department operates with a single three employee engine company. As a rule, this engine responds to all calls for service from our location at 180 W. Sixth Street. All dispatch functions are provided by the San Jacinto Police Department located at 160 W. Sixth Street. There are a total of nine suppression personnel, three on each shift, working 24 hour shifts and responding to emergencies. Almost all vacation and sick leave relief shifts are worked by one of the existing suppression personnel. There is also a Fire Chief, Assistant Fire Marshal / Prevention Officer, and department Secretary position in the Fire Department, who work a 40 hour week. The Assistant Fire Marshal / Prevention Officer works some relief shifts when suppression personnel are unavailable. Some of the difficulties in continuing to operate the San Jacinto Fire Department as a single engine response unit are: Providing Shift Supervision There is no continual daytime supervision provided for routine daily functions that require coordination and planning due to organizational needs. The Fire Chief position also is devoted to supervision of code enforcement, long range planning issues, and budgetary concerns. It seems improbable that the City of San Jacinto could pay a person department head salary and have them devote all their time to supervision of one three man engine company. However, any assignment of additional duties does detract from day to day supervision, and when other staff work is being performed, there becomes a choice of which function is more important. To hire additional daytime supervision to assist the Chief, would add to the cost the existing level of service. 1 1 1 c.. 0 Providing Adequate Training The organization and delivery of training is very difficult by someone working 24 hour shifts. With the existing manpower, one of the shift captains is responsible for this function. The same preparation for and delivery of training is necessary for one engine company, that would be required to prepare it for additional engine companies. With all the required training today, such as EMT-D and Hazardous Materials training, it becomes increasingly difficult to arrange for and schedule. Much of this training requires State certified instructors. All required training is provided by the City and overtime must be paid for employees attendance. This all adds to the cost of providing training. Providing Adequate response to Fire Calls A minimum response to structure fires is two engine companies. Currently, every structure fire call the City of San Jacinto responds to, requires assistance by one of our adjoining agencies. All Fire Departments in the State of California are members of the State Fire Mutual Aid system. Because of our limited resources, we require this aid for every structure fire. The development of a volunteer program would provide additional resources, but would not provide the resources soon enough to be included in our first response requirements. It would also add to the existing cost of providing services. Providing Relief Mannino The Fire Department is staffed with three shifts of three employees each, for a total of nine suppression personnel. Each time one of the personnel is off, it is necessary for one of the other nine to work overtime to maintain our three employee shift. This includes all vacation shifts, sick shifts, and any time a person is off for a work related injury. Since one of these type absences does not occur every shift, it would be difficult to hire and schedule additional personnel to fill the shifts. ft is more cost effective to remain at a nine employee department, and pay overtime when relief is required. It sometimes becomes difficult to secure enough personnel to provide relief when there are a lot of vacancies in a short amount of time. We also experienced this problem, in attempting to staff a second engine, during the flooding situations we recently encountered. Most of the difficulties I have outlined are encountered by any small fire department. They become less of a problem as the department size gets larger. There are many functions that a smaller Fire Department must perform, that would not require any more effort to initiate in a larger department. Some examples are in the development of training programs, policy development, and purchasing. 4 Merge with the City of Hemet Fire Department. The City has been in discussions with the City of Hemet regarding merging both Fire Departments to form one Department for both Cities. A San Jacinto City Council ad hoc committee last met with representatives from the City of Hemet sometime last summer. A cost estimate was developed to reflect the cost to the City of San Jacinto to provide the same level of service the City now has. It was a preliminary estimate, but I would imagine that the cost would not vary significantly from the estimate, because the majority of the estimate was personnel costs, and those are usually a fixed cost. It was developed assuming a single engine company Fire Station, similar to Station Two and Three in Hemet. At the conclusion of the discussions last summer, a couple of issues seemed important to Hemet. One was that the City of Hemet was interested in consolidation, but not a contract. The other issue that Hemet felt was important for the consolidation to work, was the merging of both cities' public safety dispatch centers. Combining dispatch centers has been discussed, almost as long as the Fire consolidation issue, with no immediate resolution in sight. At this point, we do not know if Hemet's position on either of the issues has changed. Contract with the Riverside County Fire Department. As I stated earlier, the Riverside County Fire Department, at the request of the City, provided a study and cost estimate to provide Fire Services to the City of San Jacinto. The cost estimate was revised last September at my request. . The Riverside County Fire Department provides contract Fire Protection Services for fourteen cities in Riverside County. I have listed below those cities, and the year they began receiving services. City Year Beaumont Calimesa Canyon Lake Desert Hot Springs Elsinore Indian Wells Moreno Valley Palm Desert Perris 1978 1991 1991 1980 1975 1980 1984 1980 1981 S • 5 Citv Year Rancho Mirage 1980 Temecula 1990 Rubidoux 1988 La Quinta 1983 The Riverside County Fire Department provides different levels of service to the contracting agencies, depending of their specifications. In the desert area, they provide paramedic services to some cities. In some larger cities, the services of a ladder truck are provided. Some cities specify different levels of manning for their units. ANALYSIS: I have created a matrix (see below),to compare the cost of the three options to provide Fire Service to the City of San Jacinto. I have attempted to compare those cost estimates based of our existing level of service. These are ball park numbers that would need to be refined through the Request for Proposal (RFP) process, if the Council decides to proceed with an RFP. RIVERSIDE SAN JACINTO HEMET COUNTY FIRE PERSONNEL COSTS (suppression only) $642,588 $711,085 $518,120 ADMINISTRATIVE COST *$88,184 $100,267 $57,739 MAINTENANCE & OPERATION $92,392 $130,094 $198,224 HAZ-MAT FEE $9,500 Included Included CAPITAL OUTLAY $0 $4,000 $0 EMT-D $5,400 Included Included SUB TOTALS $838,064 $945,446 $774,083 WILDLAND CONTRACT $15,884 $15,884 UTILITIES $15,000 EXTRA CAPTAIN POSITION $20,000 TOTALS $838,064 $961,330 $824,967 6 Administrative cost for San Jacinto was calculated by figuring the Fire Departments share of the cost of those departments that provide support services, i.e. Finance, City Manager, City Attorney, etc. During the discussions with both the City of Hemet and the Riverside County Fire Departments, the expected level of service has not been specified in writing. I have prepared a draft of the components of a Request for Proposal (see attached) for your consideration and comments, identifying the services the City of San Jacinto expects. DETERMINATION OF NEXT STEPS: In an attempt to determine the unext steps' to proceed with the study of Fire Department altematives, the City Council needs to answer three questions. 1. Does the City Council want to contine to consider alternative delivery systems for Fire Suppression Services? 2. If the City Council desires to continue to consider alternatives, and the components of the draft Request for Proposal are acceptable, which agencies does the Council wish the Request for Proposal be sent to? N 3. What amount of time would the Council consider reasonable to have this issue returned to them for a decision? I expect that either agency would require at least two to three weeks to respond to our Request for Proposal. I Er%" S A N JACINTO PROPOSED ELEMENTS OF A FIRE SERVICE REQUEST FOR PROPOSAL / CONTRACT Proposal to provide Fire Protection Services to include fire suppression, rescue, medical aid, and Haz-mat response capabilities. A fire department daily staffing level consisting of: (1) Fire Captain (1) Fire Engineer (1) Firefighter Experience and education of assigned personnel shall be comparable with established standards of the San Jacinto Fire Department, which are: Captain ► Minimum of four years experience as a firefighter with at least one year at the Fire Engineer Level. ► High School Graduate ► Class "B" Driver's License ► Current EMT-1 Certification ► State Certified Fire Officer within one year of appointment. Fire Engineer ► Two years of fire fighting experience ► High School Graduate ▪ Class "B" Driver's License ► Current EMT-1 Certification Request for Proposal page 2 Firefighter • High School Graduate Class "C" Driver's License ► Current EMT-1 Certification ► California Firefighter I Certified Continuation of: ► EMT defibrillator program, with fire personnel assigned to San Jacinto to have the necessary certified training in the use of the defibrillator. ► Public/school education programs i.e. uStop, drop, and roll" ► Fire Explorer program Responsibility for: ► Absorption of all existing regular Fire Department suppression personnel ► Haz-Mat Response including Level °A", °B", and °C" capabilities ► Regular annual hydrant testing / inspection program ► Primary arson investigation of suspicious fires and assistance in prosecution. ► Maintenance of personnel training requirements • Assumption of all hiring, personnel, and labor relation functions • Development of volunteer fire company Disaster preparedness support ( In the proposal, please define what level of support could be provided, up to and including preparation of the City's Disaster Plan.) Maintaining dedicated Fire Engine in the City of San Jacinto at all times Designation of a person to act as Fire Chief for the City of San Jacinto who will represent the City. The Fire Chief or his designated person(s) will attend staff and Council meetings, be involved with community events, and interact with the City on issues / concerns that arise. fo% • Request for Proposal page 3 ► Maintenance of existing Fire Station, including custodial, minor repairs, etc. ► Making recommendations on future fire station locations, equipment purchases, etc. Participation in: Engine company business inspection program ► City staff and Council meetings through a designated Fire Chief staff program ► Assist in City's fire sprinkler inspection program ► Community events / station tours PROPOSAL PROVISIONS The submitted proposal should include the following items: a. 3 The agency's ability to provide the above mentioned services, and the annual cost of providing such services. Any exceptions or recommended modifications to the requested services. A timeline for the transition of the department to the new agency. How ownership and replacement of Fire Department vehicles would be handled, including cost estimates for the options proposed. An explanation of the process of the absorption of the existing San Jacinto fire personnel and a description of the effects on them in the areas of wages, rank, hours worked, and seniority. Specify what type of response outside the City will be allowed. Proposals should be submitted by to Interim Fire Chief Eugene Price, 321 E. Main St., San Jacinto, Ca., 92583 by 5:00 pm on Any questions should also be directed to Interim Fire Chief at (909) 487-7342. c S A N 'JACINTO OA 7.1 Staff Report TO: Honorable Mayor and Members of the City Council FROM: Gene Price, Interim Fire Chief via Pamela S. Easter DATE: May 2, 1995 RE: Fire Department Alternatives RECOMMENDATION: 1) Give direction to staff on how to proceed. 2) Approve specified service level in draft Request for Proposal. BACKGROUND: The City of San Jacinto has been considering alternative means of Fire Suppression Services for the last couple of years. (This had not included services provided by the Fire Prevention division.) The discussions began when the Fire Chiefs of Hemet and San Jacinto were directed, by their respective City Councils, to begin exploring the possibility of consolidating both departments to improve services and reduce costs. In August of 1993, the City of San Jacinto requested a proposal from the Riverside County Fire Department, with a cost estimate from them to provide contract Fire Services for the City. Consideration continued to be given to both possibilities and in February of 1994, Fire Chief Ross Chadwick gave a report to the City Council, outlining the advantages and disadvantages of both alternatives, consolidating with Hemet, or contracting with the Riverside County Fire Department. In April of 1994, Chief Chadwick resigned to accept employment with another agency. In September of 1994, I requested and received a revised proposal from the Riverside County Fire Department. The revised proposal was requested because of some changes that have occurred in the Fire Department. The changes included the resignation of the Fire Chief, elimination of the apprentice program, and the implementation of the defibrillator (EMT-D) program. Since that time I have analyzed the following available options: 1. Continue to operate as a City of San Jacinto Fire Department 2. Consolidate the City of Hemet Fire Department with the San Jacinto Fire Department 3. Contract with the County of Riverside to provide Fire Protection services. Each option has been compared using the same level of service. An analysis of the three options are listed below. Continue to operate as the San Jacinto Fire Department. The San Jacinto Fire Department operates with a single three employee engine company. As a rule, this engine responds to all calls for service from our location at 180 W. Sixth Street. All dispatch functions are provided by the San Jacinto Police Department located at 160 W. Sixth Street. There are a total of nine suppression personnel, three on each shift, working 24 hour shifts and responding to emergencies. Almost all vacation and sick leave relief shifts are worked by one of the existing suppression personnel. There is also a Fire Chief, Assistant Fire Marshal / Prevention Officer, and department Secretary position in the Fire Department, who work a 40 hour week. The Assistant Fire Marshal / Prevention Officer works some relief shifts when suppression personnel are unavailable. Some of the difficulties in continuing to operate the San Jacinto Fire Department as a single engine response unit are: Providing Shift Supervision There is no continual daytime supervision provided for routine daily functions that require coordination and planning due to organizational needs. The Fire Chief position also is devoted to supervision of code enforcement, long range planning issues, and budgetary concerns. It seems improbable that the City of San Jacinto could pay a person department head salary and have them devote all their time to supervision of one three man engine company. However, any assignment of additional duties does detract from day to day supervision, and when other staff work is being performed, there becomes a choice of which function is more important. To hire additional daytime supervision to assist the Chief, would add to the cost the existing level of service. Providing Adequate Training The organization and delivery of training is very difficult by someone working 24 hour shifts. With the existing manpower, one of the shift captains is responsible for this function. The same preparation for and delivery of training is necessary for one engine company, that would be required to prepare it for additional engine companies. With all the required training today, such as EMT-D and Hazardous Materials training, it becomes increasingly difficult to arrange for and schedule. Much of this training requires State certified instructors. All required training is provided by the City and overtime must be paid for employees attendance. This all adds to the cost of providing training. Providing Adequate response to Fire Calls A minimum response to structure fires is two engine companies. Currently, every structure fire call the City of San Jacinto responds to, requires assistance by one of our adjoining agencies. All Fire Departments in the State of California are members of the State Fire Mutual Aid system. Because of our limited resources, we require this aid for every structure fire. The development of a volunteer program would provide additional resources, but would not provide the resources soon enough to be included in our first response requirements. It would also add to the existing cost of providing services. Providing Relief Manning The Fire Department is staffed with three shifts of three employees each, for a total of nine suppression personnel. Each time one of the personnel is off, it is necessary for one of the other nine to work overtime to maintain our three employee shift. This includes all vacation shifts, sick shifts, and any time a person is off for a work related injury. Since one of these type absences does not occur every shift, it would be difficult to hire and schedule additional personnel to fill the shifts. It is more cost effective to remain at a nine employee department, and pay overtime when relief is required. It sometimes becomes difficult to secure enough personnel to provide relief when there are a lot of vacancies in a short amount of time. We also experienced this problem, in attempting to staff a second engine, during the flooding situations we recently encountered. Most of the difficulties I have outlined are encountered by any small fire department. They become less of a problem as the department size gets larger. There are many functions that a smaller Fire Department must perform, that would not require any more effort to initiate in a larger department. Some examples are in the development of training programs, policy development, and purchasing. 4 Merge with the City of Hemet Fire Department. The City has been in discussions with the City of Hemet regarding merging both Fire Departments to form one Department for both Cities. A San Jacinto City Council ad hoc committee last met with representatives from the City of Hemet sometime last summer. A cost estimate was developed to reflect the cost to the City of San Jacinto to provide the same level of service the City now has. It was a preliminary estimate, but I would imagine that the cost would not vary significantly from the estimate, because the majority of the estimate was personnel costs, and those are usually a fixed cost. It was developed assuming a single engine company Fire Station, similar to Station Two and Three in Hemet. At the conclusion of the discussions last summer, a couple of issues seemed important to Hemet. One was that the City of Hemet was interested in consolidation, but not a contract. The other issue that Hemet felt was important for the consolidation to work, was the merging of both cities' public safety dispatch centers. Combining dispatch centers has been discussed, almost as long as the Fire consolidation issue, with no immediate resolution in sight. At this point, we do not know if Hemet's position on either of the issues has changed. Contract with the Riverside County Fire Department. As I stated earlier, the Riverside County Fire Department, at the request of the City, provided a study and cost estimate to provide Fire Services to the City of San Jacinto. The cost estimate was revised last September at my request. . The Riverside County Fire Department provides contract Fire Protection Services for fourteen cities in Riverside County. I have listed below those cities, and the year they began receiving services. City Year Beaumont 1978 Calimesa 1991 Canyon Lake 1991 Desert Hot Springs 1980 Elsinore 1975 Indian Wells 1980 Moreno Valley 1984 Palm Desert 1980 Perris 1981 5 City Year Rancho Mirage 1980 Temecula 1990 Rubidoux 1988 La Quinta 1983 The Riverside County Fire Department provides different levels of service to the contracting agencies, depending of their specifications. In the desert area, they provide paramedic services to some cities. In some larger cities, the services of a ladder truck are provided. Some cities specify different levels of manning for their units. ANALYSIS: I have created a matrix (see below),to compare the cost of the three options to provide Fire Service to the City of San Jacinto. I have attempted to compare those cost estimates based of our existing level of service. These are ball park numbers that would need to be refined through the Request for Proposal (RFP) process, if the Council decides to proceed with an RFP. SAN JACINTO RIVERSIDE HEMET COUNTY FIRE PERSONNEL COSTS (suppression only) $642,588 $711,085 $518,120 ADMINISTRATIVE COST *$88,184 $100,267 $57,739 MAINTENANCE & OPERATION $92,392 $130,094 $198,224 HAZ-MAT FEE $9,500 Included Included CAPITAL OUTLAY $0 $4,000 $0 EMT-D $5,400 Included Included SUB TOTALS $838,064 $945,446 $774,083 WILDLAND CONTRACT $15,884 $15,884 UTILITIES $15,000 EXTRA CAPTAIN POSITION $20,000 TOTALS $838,064 $961,330 $824,967 6 Administrative cost for San Jacinto was calculated by figuring the Fire Departments share of the cost of those departments that provide support services, i.e. Finance, City Manager, City Attorney, etc. During the discussions with both the City of Hemet and the Riverside County Fire Departments, the expected level of service has not been specified in writing. I have prepared a draft of the components of a Request for Proposal (see attached) for your consideration and comments, identifying the services the City of San Jacinto expects. DETERMINATION OF NEXT STEPS: In an attempt to determine the "next steps" to proceed with the study of Fire Department alternatives, the City Council needs to answer three questions. 1. Does the City Council want to contine to consider alternative delivery systems for Fire Suppression Services? 2. If the City Council desires to continue to consider alternatives, and the components of the draft Request for Proposal are acceptable, which agencies does the Council wish the Request for Proposal be sent to? 3. What amount of time would the Council consider reasonable to have this issue returned to them for a decision? I expect that either agency would require at least two to three weeks to respond to our Request for Proposal. IWN4 S A N JACINTO PROPOSED ELEMENTS OF A FIRE SERVICE REQUEST FOR PROPOSAL / CONTRACT Proposal to provide Fire Protection Services to include fire suppression, rescue, medical aid, and Haz-mat response capabilities. A fire department daily staffing level consisting of: (1) Fire Captain (1) Fire Engineer (1) Firefighter Experience and education of assigned personnel shall be comparable with established standards of the San Jacinto Fire Department, which are: Captain • Minimum of four years experience as a firefighter with at least one year at the Fire Engineer Level. • High School Graduate ► Class "B" Driver's License Current EMT-1 Certification ► State Certified Fire Officer within one year of appointment. Fire Engineer ► Two years of fire fighting experience • High School Graduate Class "B" Driver's License Current EMT-1 Certification Request for Proposal page 2 Firefighter • High School Graduate ► Class "C" Driver's License ► Current EMT-1 Certification • California Firefighter I Certified Continuation of: • EMT defibrillator program, with fire personnel assigned to San Jacinto to have the necessary certified training in the use of the defibrillator. • Public/school education programs i.e. °Stop, drop, and roll" ► Fire Explorer program Responsibility for: ▪ Absorption of all existing regular Fire Department suppression personnel Haz-Mat Response including Level "A", "B", and "C" capabilities Regular annual hydrant testing / inspection program Primary arson investigation of suspicious fires and assistance in prosecution. • Maintenance of personnel training requirements Assumption of all hiring, personnel, and labor relation functions Development of volunteer fire company ► Disaster preparedness support ( In the proposal, please define what level of support could be provided, up to and including preparation of the City's Disaster Plan.) • Maintaining dedicated Fire Engine in the City of San Jacinto at all times ► Designation of a person to act as Fire Chief for the City of San Jacinto who will represent the City. The Fire Chief or his designated person(s) will attend staff and Council meetings, be involved with community events, and interact with the City on issues / concerns that arise. Request for Proposal page 3 Maintenance of existing Fire Station, including custodial, minor repairs, etc. Making recommendations on future fire station locations, equipment purchases, etc. Participation in: ► Engine company business inspection program ► City staff and Council meetings through a designated Fire Chief staff program ► Assist in City's fire sprinkler inspection program • Community events / station tours PROPOSAL PROVISIONS The submitted proposal should include the following items: t• a. The agency's ability to provide the above mentioned services, and the annual cost of providing such services. Any exceptions or recommended modifications to the requested services. A timeline for the transition of the department to the new agency. How ownership and replacement of Fire Department vehicles would be handled, including cost estimates for the options proposed. An explanation of the process of the absorption of the existing San Jacinto fire personnel and a description of the effects on them in the areas of wages, rank, hours worked, and seniority. Specify what type of response outside the City will be allowed. Proposals should be submitted by to Interim Fire Chief Eugene Price, 321 E. Main St., San Jacinto, Ca., 92583 by 5:00 pm on Any questions should also be directed to Interim Fire Chief at (909) 487-7342. PrOMPI S A N JACINTO PROPOSED ELEMENTS OF A FIRE SERVICE REQUEST FOR PROPOSAL CONTRACT Proposal to provide Fire Protection Services to include fire suppression, rescue, medical aid, and Haz-mat response capabilities. A fire department daily staffing level consisting of: (1) Fire Captain (1) Fire Engineer (1) Firefighter Experience and education of assigned personnel shall be comparable with established standards of the San Jacinto Fire Department, which are: Captain ► Minimum of four years experience as a firefighter with at least one year at the Fire Engineer Level. High School Graduate ► Class "B" Driver's License ► Current EMT-1 Certification State Certified Fire Officer within one year of appointment. Fire Engineer ► Two years of fire fighting experience High School Graduate ► Class "B" Driver's License ► Current EMT-1 Certification Request for Proposal page 2 Firefighter High School Graduate ► Class "C" Driver's License Current EMT-1 Certification California Firefighter I Certified Continuation of: ► EMT defibrillator program, with fire personnel assigned to San Jacinto to have the necessary certified training in the use of the defibrillator. ► Public/school education programs i.e. "Stop, drop, and roll" ► Fire Explorer program Responsibility for: Absorption of all existing regular Fire Department suppression personnel Haz-Mat Response including Level "A", "B", and "C" capabilities Regular annual hydrant testing / inspection program Primary arson investigation of suspicious fires and assistance in prosecution. ► Maintenance of personnel training requirements Assumption of all hiring, personnel, and labor relation functions Development of volunteer fire company ► Disaster preparedness support ( In the proposal, please define what level of support could be provided, up to and including preparation of the City's Disaster Plan.) Maintaining dedicated Fire Engine in the City of San Jacinto at all times Designation of a person to act as Fire Chief for the City of San Jacinto who will represent the City. The Fire Chief or his designated person(s) will attend staff and Council meetings, be involved with community events, and interact with the City on issues / concerns that arise. Request for Proposal page 3 Maintenance of existing Fire Station, including custodial, minor repairs, etc. Making recommendations on future fire station locations, equipment, purchases, etc. Participation in: ► Engine company business inspection program ► City staff and Council meetings through a designated Fire Chief staff program ► Assist in City's fire sprinkler inspection program ► Community events / station tours PROPOSAL PROVISIONS The submitted proposal should include the following items: 1 The agency's ability to provide the above mentioned services, and the annual cost of providing such services. 2 Any exceptions or recommended modifications to the requested services. 3 A timeline for the transition of the department to the new agency. 4 How ownership and replacement of Fire Department vehicles would be handled, including cost estimates for the options proposed. 5 An explanation of the process of the absorption of the existing San Jacinto fire personnel and a description of the effects on them in the areas of wages, rank, hours worked, and seniority. 6 Specify what type of response outside the City will be allowed. Proposals should be submitted by to Interim Fire Chief Eugene Price, 312 E. Main St., San Jacinto, Ca., 92583 by 5:00 pm on Any questions should also be directed to Interim Fire Chief at (909) 487-7342. TO: FROM: DATE: SUBJECT: STAFF REPORT Honorable Mayor and Members of the City Council Nathaniel Holmes III, Chief of Police via Pamela S. Easter, City Manger May 2, 1995 Police Memorial Caravan Au a JDA `1•. r / SS L n���� Ave RECOMMENDATION Council approval for one police unit to participate in statewide memorial caravan to Police Memorial services in Sacramento. FISCAL IMPACT Cost of gasoline for round trip from San Jacinto to Sacramento. Cost is estimated to be $55.00. BACKGROUND A memorial service is held each year, at the Police Memorial in Sacramento, to honor officers killed in the line of duty. Police units from around the state caravan to Sacramento. One of our officers has volunteered his time to participate in the caravan from Southern California. The Police Department is asking for authorization from the Council to use one of our marked police units and pay for the gasoline for the trip. The cost of gasoline is estimated to be $55.00, based on round trip mileage of 920 miles and 23 miles per gallon. The Police Memorial caravan is scheduled for May 18, 1995. e CITY OF SAN JACINTO Staff Report TO: Honorable Mayor and Councilmembers FROM: Les Evans, Director of Public Works via Pamela S. Easter, City Manager DATE: May 2, 1995 SUBJECT: CITY SPONSORED AUCTION RECOMMENDATION Receive and file. BACKGROUND The City of San Jacinto undertook a public auction to dispose of a variety of surplus City equipment on Saturday April 8, 1995. The auction raised $28,239.00 with the 1968 fire truck ($3,300.00) and 1988 Dodge 4x4 ($3,250.00) bringing in the most money. 22 vehicles were sold for $26,510.00 with the balance of the money collected for miscellaneous materials such as tires, exercise equipment, computers and Christmas decorations. A comprehensive list is attached for your review. Expenses to advertise and operate the auction included the following: Advertising Cost Press Enterprise (4-days) Orange County Register (4-days) San Diego Union (4-days) Hemet News The Classified Green Sheet Auctioneer $ 340.36 615.40 753.42 84.37 13.90 $1, 807.45 Kozma Appraisal and Auction Service (15 percent of Gross Receipts) $4,235.85 City Sponsored Auction May 2, 1995 Page Two Staff Time 35 hours @ an average of $20 / hr. 13 hours @ $13 / hr. TOTAL COST 750.00 269.00 1,019.00 $ 7,062.30 Net revenue from the auction was $21,176.70. 69 bidders attended the auction. A breakdown of their location and money spent are listed below. County Registered Bidder's Dollars Spent Orange 6 $ 750.00 Riverside 57 18,030.00 San Diego 3 2,227.00 San Diego 3 7.232.00 Total 69 $28,239.00 Although the auction was successful, there are no detailed records of previous auctions and, therefore, no way to compare the relative merits of a local auction versus sending items to be auctioned to sites in San Diego or San Bernardino. Staff who worked on setting up the auction are inclined to believe that future auctions at the City Yard are not advisable unless a large amount of equipment and material is available for sale. 1 33 2 32 3 31 4 30 5 29 6 28 7 27 8 9 26 91 10 11 12 25 13 21, 22, 24 20 92 14 15 16 93 18,19 17 48 47 46 44,45 43 49 42 50 51 39,41 40 $ 7.50 45.00 35.00 27.50 5.00 7.50 5.00 45.00 30.00 45.00 15.00 60.00 20.00 4.00 17.50 18.00 40.00 25.00 2.00 11.00 13.00 10.00 2.00 7.00 40.00 320.00 5.00 9.00 1.00 65.00 5.00 7.50 45.00 10.00 5.00 40.00 25.0.:.; 4.00 10.00 25.00 10.00 15.00 3.00 AUCTION SALES LIST bumpers tool boxes for truck bucket seats diagnostic center car seats grease pump car seats radial saw fire hose tire changer tires carpet cleaner light bars/taillight lenses pipe racks street signs light bar parts drill press engine hoist exercise bench/bike straight bench/step machine rowing machine weed burner/welder doors Christmas decorations Christmas decorations light bars radios/scanner/desk florescent lights/vents water meter registers anvil doors, engine parts radiators pagers/scanner/battery chargers police department car prisoner cages axles ceiling mounted heaters swamp cooler plaques kitchen range fire tree/paint sprayer police helmets desk chairs/folding chairs dishwashers 38 30.00 folding chairs 94 15.00 hydraulic hoses/fittings 53 35.00 Xerox machine 54 40.00 computer 55 7.50 computer 56 10.00 computer 57 12.50 computer 59 7.00 monitor 58 15.00 monitor 60 2.00 monitor 61 5.00 monitor 62 45.00 keyboards, misc 63 5.00 engine block, electric typewriter 64 60.00 radios/transmitter/antennas 37 17.00 tables/motorola radios 36 2.00 steel desk 65 200.00 spot lights 35 5.00 wooden desk 66 10.00 traffic counters 34 12.00 pet cage 68 45.00 cast iron valves 67 7.50 fender, misc. steel 90 1,200.00 1987 Chevy Caprice 89 3,250.00 1988 Dodge 4x4 88 1,700.00 1986 Ford (Animal Control) 87 1,400.00 1970 Dodge Pump 1 1/2 ton 86 800.00 1987 Chevy Caprice 85 1,700.00 1988 Mercury Cougar 84 1,000.00 1990 Chevy Caprice 83 750.00 1985 Ltd 82 1,300.00 1987 Chrysler 81 700.00 1990 Chevy Caprice 80 1,100.00 1988 Ford Taurus 79 2,700.00 1987 Dodge Pickup 78 700.00 1985 Pontiac 77 76 1,000.00 1990 Chevy Caprice 75 500.00 1984 Pontiac 74 450.00 1984 Chevy Impala 73 750.00 1987 Chevy Caprice 72 3,300.00 1968 Fire Truck 69 210.00 Fork Lift 70 800.00 Iveco Van 71 400.00 Iveco Van 68 800.00 Iveco Van TOTAL$26,510.00 TO: Honorable Mayor and Councilmembers FROM: Rod Butler, Assistant to the City Manager via: Pamela S. Easter, City Manager DATE: May 2, 1995 RE: ADDITIONAL ALLOCATION OF COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT BLOCK GRANT FUNDS --FISCAL YEAR 1995-96 Recommendation Direct staff to place the additional $37,563 Community Development Block Grant allocation in one of the two previously approved city projects for the 1995-96 Fiscal Year, or suggest ideas for a new project (non-public service) to which the additional funds could be programmed. Background At its regular meeting on January 17, the City Council approved a Fiscal Year 1995-96 Community Development Block Grant funding allocation for submittal to the Riverside County Economic Development Agency. The allocation approved by the Council was as follows: Public Service Projects: Phoenix Programs $12,858 Alliance for the Mentally III $10,000 City Projects: Tot Lot in Sallee Park $60,000 Curb, Gutter, Sidewalk Work $79,762 City/Public Service Project: Community Outreach $26,600 TOTAL $189,220 This proposed allocation was based on an early estimate from County EDA staff on the total amount of CDBG funds that San Jacinto would receive for the 1995-96 Fiscal Year. Now that the U.S. Department of Housing and Urban Development has released the final CDBG allocations for 1995-96, city staff members have been notified by the County that San Jacinto will receive $226,783 for the new year, $37,563 more than the original estimate. Page Two Additional Allocation of CDBG Funds May 2, 1995 Allocation Options for the Additional Funds The Council has two options in terms of programming the additional CDBG monies. The first is to increase the allocations of one or both of the previously approved city projects: Sallee Park Tot Lot and curb/gutter/sidewalk improvements. This action could be taken by vote of the Council without any additional public hearings. The second option is to develop a new city project (it cannot be a "public service" project) for the use of the additional $37,563. Creating a new project would require a public notice and a public hearing. Because San Jacinto has already exceeded the 15 percent cap for public service projects during the 1995-96 program year, it will not be possible for the Council to allocate any of the additional monies to existing public service projects or to create a new public service project. If a new project is developed, it will have to be an improvement project such as a tot lot, sidewalk installation, residential or commercial rehabilitation, etc. As a temporary measure, the Riverside County EDA has added San Jacinto's additional funds to the current year sidewalk/curb/gutter project. However, the Council may direct staff to request a change in the assignment of some or all of the new monies. 41111 IS A N JACI NTO I. 5 Staff Report TO: Honorable Mayor and Councilmembers FROM: Les Evans, Director of Public Works via Pamela S. Easter DATE: May 2, 1995 RE: APPROVAL OF PLANS AND SPECIFICATIONS FOR THE IMPROVEMENT OF THE SAN JACINTO RIVER CROSSING AT LAKE PARK DRIVE AND AUTHORIZATION TO ADVERTISE FOR BIDS Recommendation: Approve the plans and specifications for Improvement of the San Jacinto River Crossing at Lake Park Drive and authorize staff to advertise for bids. Background: As a result of the 1993 winter floods, the City was granted $40,000 to mitigate the tendency of Lake Park Drive to wash out during heavy flows in the San Jacinto River. The mitigation method recommended by the Federal Emergency Management Agency (FEMA) is the installation of concrete retaining walls (cut-off walls) on both the upstream and downstream side of the roadway adjacent to the lowest section of pavement. These concrete cut-off walls would be poured seven to ten feet below the river bed to help anchor the roadway in place. Plans have been prepared by Keith Companies Engineering. The project is ready to be advertised. The Engineer's estimate of project cost is $53,000. Should the low bid exceed the $40,000 FEMA grant, the City Council will be asked to appropriate gasoline tax funds or local transportation funds to make up the shortfall. Staff is also pursuing whether 1995 FEMA storm damage funds could be used to make up this possible shortfall rather than Gas Tax or local transportation funds. Staff is recommending this interim street section for several reasons. One reason for the recommendation is that FEMA has agreed to fund the concrete cut-off walls and the other is that should a bridge be approved in the near future, it would be at least three years before environmental approvals, engineering design and construction could be completed. The funds granted by FEMA for the cut-off walls will in no way affect our application for FEMA funds for a bridge. "7'0_ STAFF REPORT TO: Honorable Mayor and Members of the City Council FROM: Brian McNabb, Director of Community Development via Pamela S. Easter, City Manager DATE: May 2, 1995 SUBJECT: SUPPORT OF WRCOG POSITIONS ON THE RE -AUTHORIZATION OF THE FEDERAL ENDANGERED SPECIES ACT RECOMMENDATION Staff recommends that the City Council adopt the attached Resolution in support of the WRCOG positions on the re -authorization of the federal Endangered Species Act. BACKGROUND The federal Endangered Species Act (ESA) is the body of federal law that provides for the designation and protection of plant and animal species which are considered rare or declining in number. The ESA is administered by the Department of the Interior, and more specifically by the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service (USFWS). At the present time, re- authorization of the ESA is pending before Congress. The ESA has had a profound impact on local governments, altering land use decisions and plans, leading to higher housing costs, the loss of jobs, and impacting the provision of public services (i.e., maintaining flood control facilities). On the local level, both WRCOG and EMWD have been proponents of amending the ESA. WRCOG is asking that the City adopt a resolution that addresses seven key topic areas. These key topic areas are as follows: LISTING DECISIONS: FUNDING: ECONOMIC IMPACTS: PUBLIC LANDS: It is recommended that more extensive research and information be provided and considered prior to the listing of a species. It is recommended that more federal and state funding be provided for conservation planning and mitigation. It is recommended that economic cost considerations be included in listing decisions for the conservation and recovery of species. It is recommended that the use of public lands be the first priority for the purposes of meeting the habitat conservation needs of the ESA. City Council Staff Report May 2, 1995 Page No. 2 SPECIES vs. HABITAT: It is recommended that a broader, multiple species habitat conservation approach be utilized over the current individual, species by species approach to listing and conservation. ABUSE OF DISCRETION: It is recommended'that clear listing guidelines be established to reduce administrative discretion and avoid unwarranted requests for additional information by USFWS staff. APPROVED PLANS: It is recommended that approved multi -species conservation plans should be accepted and certified as meeting all local obligations under the ESA. Additional local action should not be required for any new species listed after certification of a plan. Additional materials explaining these issues in greater detail are attached for your benefit. CCRPT-95\ESA-AMDT. RES RESOLUTION NO. 95- A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF SAN JACINTO, CALIFORNIA, SUPPORTING AMENDMENTS TO THE FEDERAL ENDANGERED SPECIES ACT WHEREAS, reauthorization of the Federal Endangered Species Act (hereinafter, the Act) is pending before the Congress of the United States of America; and, WHEREAS, the Act as currently constituted, implemented and administered has resulted in significant impacts on local governments, jobs, housing availability and costs, essential public services, and the overall quality of life and private property in those areas and communities affected by threatened and endangered species and their habitat; and, WHEREAS, amending the Act can resolve and rectify many of these problems while simultaneously providing adequate safeguards to ensure conservation of the Nation's threatened and endangered wildlife resources; and, WHEREAS, amendments to the Act have been identified and endorsed by the Western Riverside Council of Governments, of which the City of San Jacinto is a member, to provide for human needs and a sound economy while also providing for the long-term survival of rare, threatened and endangered species; NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED, that the City of San Jacinto of the State of California does hereby endorse and support amendments to the federal Endangered Species Act which are consistent with the following principles: a. Listing Decisions - The existing requirements for use of "best scientific and commercial data available" and "substantial scientific or commercial information" do not always ensure an adequate level of data and information upon which to make listing decisions. More extensive information and a higher factual and scientific threshold should be required to support the listing process. This should also include an improved and expanded scientific peer review process, and standards for the content of citizen listing petitions. Funding - The Federal and State governments should fund a fair -share contribution of conservation planning and mitigation. Financial assistance should be provided to local governments to assist in the development and implementation of conservation efforts; such as matching funds, funding for debt service, greater use of Land and Water Conservation fund monies, loan guarantees, income or capital gains tax credit, and similar measures. c. Economic Impact - Listing decisions currently do not include consideration of the economic actions, conditions and costs necessary for the conservation and recovery of a species. Economic cost considerations should be included in listing decisions, and economics infused throughout the process. This is not necessarily to say that economics should outweigh species protection, but rather that the law should give more consideration to the economic affects and cost associated with the listing and recovery of a species. d. Public Lands - Maximum use of public lands for conservation of threatened and endangered species. The use of public lands should be the first priority for the purposes of meeting the habitat and conservation needs of the ESA. e. Species vs. Habitat -There is concern over the individual, species -by - species approach to listing and conservation. A broader, multiple -species habitat conservation approach is favorable. Language which recognizes the value of comprehensive multi -species planning and conservation should be included in the ESA. Abuse of Administrative Discretion - The ESA must establish clear guidelines and standards for the type and extent of biological and other information needed or required by the USFWS for habitat conservation plans, and the like, to avoid unwarranted pressure for more information and studies from federal staff. There should be no "moving targets". Criteria should be established up front in the process. Agreement on Approved Plans - Once a multi -species conservation plan is approved, it should be accepted as meeting all local obligations for the area covered and any new species subsequently listed should not require additional action if that species is adequately covered by the previously approved plan. Mitigation of new species subsequently listed will be the sole responsibility of the federal government. PASSED, APPROVED AND ADOPTED this 4th day of April, 1995 by the following vote: AYES: NOES: ABSENT: ABSTAIN: ATTEST: Deputy City Clerk Mayor CERTIFICATION The foregoing is certified to be a true copy of Resolution No. 95- duly adopted by the said City Council of the City of San Jacinto on the date set forth therein. Deputy City Clerk ❑ LISTING DECISIONS BACKGROUND: The listing of a species as threatened or endangered is a key component of the Endangered Species Act (ESA). Two procedures are available to initiate the listing process: • First, the Secretary of the Interior may list a species on the basis of "the best scientific and commercial data available" ...without regard to the decision's possible economic, social or political effects. (16 U.S.C. § 1533(b)(1)(A); 50 C.F.R. §§ 424.10, 424.11(c). In other words, the only information which may be considered concerns the species; the economic impacts of listing play no role in the process, except in the case of designating critical habitat and in developing recovery plans (see Economic Impact). The Secretary must clearly describe the grounds for the decision to list a species in the Federal Register listing Notices, and this decision must be supported by expert scientific analysis that establishes a rational connection between the available evidence and the conclusion reached. • Second, the ESA also provides for a citizen's petition process which allows an individual person to initiate a listing when a species is not listed on the Secretary's own initiative. The citizen's petition need only be supported by "substantial scientific or commercial information indicating that the petitioned action may be warranted" (16 U.S.C. § 1533 (b)(3)(A); 50 C.F.R. § 424.14(b)(1). "Substantial information" is defined as "that amount of information that would lead a reasonable person to believe that the measure proposed in the petition may be warranted". Under the citizen's petition process, the Secretary considers whether the petition: o Contains a detailed narrative justification for the recommended listing action, including a description (based on available information) of past and present threats to, and numbers and distribution of, the species at issue; o Provides information regarding the species' status over all or " a significant portion of its range"; o Is accompanied by appropriate supporting documentation, such as bibliographic references and copies of applicable publications, reports, letters, maps, etc. ISSUE: The existing requirement for use of "best scientific and commercial data available" or "substantial scientific or commercial information" does not always ensure an adequate level of information upon which to make listing decisions. POSITION: More extensive information should be required to support the listing process: • Establish higher factual and scientific thresholds for listing determinations / Establish higher factual standards or "check -list" for content of citizen listing petitions • Improve and expand scientific peer review process, including opportunities for"substantial [scientific] disagreement regarding the sufficiency or accuracy of available data" ✓ Require a public hearing in the area(s) that would be most affected by the proposed listing o FUNDING BACKGROUND: Funding to implement the ESA is typically authorized by Congress through appropriations to the Department of Interior's Fish and Wildlife Service to enable it to carry out such functions and responsibilities as it may be given under this Act. For the most part, these appropriations are primarily for financing the ongoing day-to-day operations and functions of the USFWS. Section 13(d)(3) of the Act (as amended, 1992), authorizes the Secretary of Interior to "acquire areas of land, or interests therein, which are suitable for the conservation of endangered or threatened species...except that such acquisitions shall be accomplished only with such funds as may be appropriated therefor by the Congress or donated for such purposes..." Section 6 of the Act (as amended, 1992) also authorizes the Secretary "to enter into a cooperative agreement with any State which establishes and maintains an adequate and active program for the conservation of endangered and threatened species" [of wildlife and plants]. The cooperative agreement program also authorizes the State [fish and game] agency to "acquire land or aquatic habitat or interests therein, for the conservation of resident endangered or threatened species of fish or wildlife or plants..." While these sections of the ESA provide potential funding mechanisms, the fact is that no federal grant program or other large funding source is currently available for purchasing habitat or otherwise mitigating for threatened and endangered species. The Land and Water Conservation Fund (LWCF) frequently has been mentioned as a possible funding source for habitat purchase/mitigation. The LWCF has $8.235 billion, against which a small amount of money is appropriated each year for specific projects nationwide. However, Congress keeps the fund as large as possible to help offset the national debt. It would seem that more funds could be released or the statute amended to authorize loans or bonds or to pay for needed debt service to repay these loans/bonds to purchase habitat, since the money would eventually be paid back. More locally, the argument has been made that the ESA is a federal law, and therefor the federal government should provide the funding for the protection it mandates; i.e., the benefits of protecting species are shared by all citizens, therefor all citizens should share the costs, and not primarily or disproportionately by the private landowners who have endangered species, or their habitat, on their land. The countervailing argument is that the leading cause of the decline in native species is habitat destruction as a result of industrial, commercial and residential development, livestock grazing, offroad vehicle use, mining and timber harvesting, water and flood control projects, and agricultural activities, among other things; and therefore, the burden of funding species conservation should be borne by those state and local jurisdictions whose land use planning and development permitting activities allowed this habitat destruction in the first place. ISSUE: Federal, state and local governments, and their citizens, share the responsibilities and benefits of protecting species and habitat, and each should share the costs. With regard to the federal role and responsibility, the ESA or other separate legislation should provide adequate funding or strategies to the task at hand. ❑ FUNDING (continued) POSITION: The federal government should fund a fair -share contribution of species and habitat conservation, planning and mitigation. Financial assistance should be provided to assist in the development and implementation of local conservation efforts, as follows: / "Line Item" or other special Congressional appropriations / Matching Funds J Land and Water Conservation Fund or reallocation of outer continental shelf oil and gas royalties / Debt Service Legislation (pay the full amount of interest on a loan, bond or other debt instrument used by a state or political subdivision to fund habitat acquisition implementing an HCP) J Exchanges/acquisitions involving federal assets (BLM land exchange, base closure lands, properties held by Resolution Trust Corporation or Farmers Home Mortgage Administration - or portion of sale proceeds) J Loan guarantees J Federal grant or other assistance programs J New Federal Funding Source to Implement the ESA J Income or Capital Gains Tax Credit for conservation of habitat lands ❑ ECONOMIC IMPACT 1CKGROUND: While listing decisions currently do not include consideration of the economic actions and conditions necessary for the conservation of a species, the ESA does contain provisions for the consideration of economic effects regarding the designation of critical habitats and the development of recovery plans. More specifically, when designating critical habitat, the Secretary must consider, in a detailed economic impact analysis, the probable economic and other impacts of the designation on current or proposed human activities (16 U.S.C. § 1533(b)(2); 50 C.F.R. § 424.19). Moreover, once a species is listed, the Secretary -equired to develop and implement a "recovery plan" providing for the conservation and survival of the apecies, unless s/he finds that such a plan would not promote the species' conservation. Each recovery plan must contain "Estimates of time required for and costs of achieving the plan's ultimate goal of species recovery..." (16 U.S.C. § 1533(f)(1)(B). Along these lines, the USFWS has implemented a Species Recovery Priority System which "assigns each [listed] species a rank of 1 to 18 according to the degree of threat, recovery potential,...and presence of an actual or imminent conflict between the species' conservation and development or other economic activity" (USFWS "Policy Guidelines for Planning and Coordinating Recovery of Threatened and Endangered Species"; May 1990, pp. 4-5). The failure to designate critical habitat and to develop and implement recovery plans at the time of listing is a common problem. A major cause of this failure is inadequate funding of the USFWS to carry out these functions and provisions of the ESA. -ny sectors of the business community and private landowners feel the ESA should be modified to focus cure heavily on the economic analysis and impact of listing decisions. These sectors believe the federal government should be required to prepare a detailed economic study that outlines the total impact on local government, jobs, housing availability and cost, essential public services, and the overall impact on the quality of life in the areas affected by the proposed listing. "Economic impact" may be the most controversial issue surrounding reauthorization of the ESA, as it is viewed by the environmental community as an attempt to ignore or circumvent the original purpose of the Act. There is already inadequate funding and resources under the existing ESA to designate critical habitat and develop and implement recovery plans [which already include economic analysis requirements]. If this funding were provided, there would be no need for additional economic analysis. In the absence of this funding however, new requirements for such analysis may be necessary. ISSUE: Listing decisions currently do not include considerations of the economic actions and conditions necessary for the conservation and recovery of a species. POSITION: Consideration of economic costs should be included in listing decisions: ✓ Include economic cost considerations in the listing process ./ Require approval of Recovery Plans at the time of final listing or within a specified time after listing and provide adequate funding ✓ Strengthen the requirements for and limit discretionary exceptions to designation of critical habitat concurrently with species listing and provide adequate funding for economic analysis ❑ PUBLIC LAK iS BACKGROUND: The responsibility for conserving listed species usually involves owners of private property where these species or their habitat occur. Under these circumstances, the ESA provisions prohibiting "take" has potential implications relative to the Fifth and Fourteenth Amendments as regards compensation and due process. The issue of private property could be avoided or reduced by making maximum use of public lands for the conservation of threatened and endangered species and their habitat. This strategy however, does assume that the species/habitat in question occurs on public lands and in adequate quantity and quality to ensure the long-term survival of the species. To the extent that adequate quantities and quality of existing or suitable habitat/species do occur on public lands, these lands could be available and used to the maximum degree possible in fulfilling the requirements of the Act. This strategy might require that management practices on these lands be changed from managing them for resource harvesting, multiple uses, recreation, or other uses that do not emphasize conservation of wildlife resources, to managing them exclusively for biodiversity. Another strategy for maximizing use of public lands for ESA purposes is the exchange of public lands with low wildlife resource values for private lands with high wildlife resource values. The Bureau of Land Management (BLM) currently uses this technique in the western Riverside region for SKR conservation. In addition, Resolution Trust Corporation assets and Farmers Home Mortgage Administration assets are routinely sold at auction and/or through direct negotiations to recover federal funds lost from the S&L bail- out or through defaulted loans. When such lands have conservation value, they may be acquired by a local, state or federal conservation agency. However, since these are already public domain lands, they should be available in some manner to serve as the source of federal contributions for ESA habitat conservation purposes. For example, the sale proceeds or a portion thereof could be used to establish a trust fund for purchasing lands with desired conservation value for ESA purposes; to underwrite loan guarantees or debt service; or, to serve as a new federal funding source to implement the ESA. In addition, listing decisions, critical habitat designations, and recovery plans should examine the extent to which all public lands have existing or suitable habitat for the species under review. This information should be considered and identified in the initial and final Federal Register Notice as well as the entire listing process. Toward this end, the National Biological Survey should initially focus on listed and candidate species and their occurrence on public lands. ISSUE: The use of public lands should be the first priority for purposes of meeting the habitat/species conservation needs of the ESA. POSITION: Maximum use of public lands for conservation of threatened and endangered species: Give priority to the use of public lands in species conservation and recovery efforts. All federal public lands should be reviewed and considered for ESA needs, as outlined above. ./ The National Biological Survey should focus on listed and candidate species and their occurrence on public lands SPECIES VS. HABITAT BACKGROUND: The current species -by -species approach to listing and conservation planning for threatened and endangered species is particularly problematic in California because of the sheer numbers of species involved and the land use patterns associated with a growing population. In 1973, California had 24 federally listed species. As of September 1993, California had 109 listed and 12 candidate animal species and 213 plant species; another 48 species are proposed for listing. There are 1013 candidate species. This is representative of California's rich ecosystem diversity. Within these natural ecosystems, there are as many as 400 distinct habitat types and an unusually high number of plants and animals (8000 species of plants; 821 vertebrate species, including 368 bird species, 214 mammals, 129 species of reptiles and amphibians, and 110 species of fish). An estimated 35 animal and 38 plant species have become extinct or are no longer found within the state. At the same time, California is home to a growing abundance of people. During the 1980's, California's population grew at nearly three times the national rate (26% vs. 9.8%). The total population in the state as of January 1993 was 31.5 million. The state's population is expected to double to over 60 million people by the year 2040. The species -by -species, agency -by -agency management approach characterized by the current ESA is typically fraught with controversy and gridlock. The current ESA is not ecosystem based, is not proactive but rather reactive (conservation efforts are not undertaken until a species is already listed), and can be prohibitively expensive and time-consuming Just as one species gets resolved, another is listed and the process has to start over again. A broader and more flexible approach is to encourage plans that conserve sensitive habitat types or multiple -species rather than individual species; i.e., multiple -species habitat conservation plans (HCPs). HCPs are a more systematic, anticipatory and proactive approach to coordinated resource management that allows for both reasonable, compatible development and certainty in planning for developers and conservationists alike. HCPs are gaining in popularity as a way to minimize conflicts between listed/candidate species and local land use development. While the ESA includes provisions for HCPs as part of a Section 10(a) "incidental take" permit (16 U.S.C. § 1539(a)(2)(A), HCPs are not a 'cure-all', however, and can also be fraught with many problems: reliance on inadequate scientific data, monitoring and enforcement; failure to provide for species recovery; use of an HCP in lieu of recovery plans or designation of critical habitat. Indeed, the need for biological data increases exponentially when the focus moves from individual species to habitat or ecosystem. Nonetheless, HCPs provide an greater opportunity for certainty in planning for both environmental and societal needs. ISSUE: Should the ESA continue to address threatened and endangered species on an individual basis, or should the focus of conservation planning emphasize sensitive habitats and entire ecosystems. SPECIES VS. HABITAT (continued) POSITION: J Authorize multi -species habitat management plans as an alternative to recovery plans and provide adequate funding to local jurisdictions for MSHCP development ./ Establish clear guidelines for the content of MSHCPs 0 ADMINISTRATIVE DISCRETION BACKGROUND: The current regulations and procedures for implementing the provisions of the ESA allow for considerable administrative discretion by USFWS staff. While this does provide opportunities for flexibility to respond to differing conditions and circumstances, it also allows for uncertainties and unwarranted pressures. A particularly vexing and frustrating example is biology; how much is enough or needed to serve as a basis for conservation planning? The answer is too often a moving target...no two biologists can agree. This unknown aspect always leads to more studies, which means more time and money. The need for more scientific data appears to increase exponentially. Meanwhile, the property owners who are affected are caught in the middle. There needs to be more certainty in the planning process and requirements at the on -set. In the absence of designating critical habitat and development of recovery plans, the federal regulators ought not ask of local agencies any more than would be provided from the regulators themselves. ISSUE: The type and extent of administrative discretion afforded to USFWS staff. POSITION: Reduce the ex -tent of administrative discretion to avoid unwarranted pressure from federal staff. Establish clear guidelines and standards as to the type and extent of biological data and other scientific information required for habitat conservation plans, recovery plans, and the like. ❑ AGREEMENT ON APPROVED PLANS BACKGROUND: A pronounced frustration with the ESA is the lack of 'closure'; i.e., just as one species gets resolved, another is listed and the process has to start over again. This aspect of the Act contributes to continuing controversy and gridlock. This is a particularly frustrating dilemma in the western Riverside region where upwards of $28 million dollars and over eight years of efforts have been directed toward the conservation of the Stephens' kangaroo rat, and several additional species have subsequently been listed with several others also being considered for listing or as candidate species. There doesn't appear to be any end in sight; like the Everyready rabbit, it just keeps going... and going...and going. This issue is closely related to that of Species vs. Habitat. Once a comprehensive, multi -species conservation management plan is approved, it should be certified as meeting all local obligations for the area covered by the plan. Any new species subsequently listed should not require additional action if that species or its habitat is adequately covered by the previously approved plan. Mitigation of new species subsequently listed would be the sole responsibility of the federal government. Under these conditions, the ESA should address the issue of 'closure' for local conservation management activities. There should be a point at which the USFWS certifies as complete those areas implementing comprehensive multi -species conservation management plans for the affected territory. Once this certification has been received, no additional conservation activities would be required of the local plan. The federal government would bear the full responsibility of any and all mitigation required for a subsequently listed species, as this would constitute an unfunded federal mandate. ISSUE: 'Closure' for local conservation planning and implementation/management activities; agreement on approved plans. POSITION: Approved multi -species conservation management plans should be accepted and certified as meeting all local obligations under the ESA. Once certification is received, any new species subsequently listed should require no additional conservation efforts if that species is adequately covered by the approved plan. The federal government should bear the sole and full responsibility of any and all mitigation required for a subsequently listed species. c 6 c ,) A N JACINTO Au b4DA7• 7 Staff Report TO: Honorable Mayor and Members of the City Council FROM: Brian McNabb, Director of Community Development Nathaniel Holmes III, Police Chief Gene Price, Interim Fire Chief Rod Butler, Assistant to the City Manager Larry Weaver, Interim Finance Director Via: Pamela S. Easter, City Manager DATE: May 2, 1995 RE: General Fund and Service Level Issues RECOMMENDATION: Receive for information and provide direction to staff, as appropriate. At the City Council meeting of April 18th, staff was directed to review service levels of the City, particularly as they relate to public safety services, in light of the revenue loss caused directly (i.e. fewer building permits) and indirectly (i.e. State revenue deductions) by the recession. This report is an attempt to condense a very complex issue to a few pages. In order to adequately address the subject, the report is broken into various sections so the Council and public can see demographic and revenue trends; the efforts made to reduce expenditures; and, the changes in service levels. Staff has included a look back over the last five years to identify the historical trends; developed some preliminary estimates for Fiscal Year 95-96; and, in some cases, looked as much as ten years into the future. DEMOGRAPHICS The City has experienced a significant amount of growth in the past twenty years. This growth can be measured both in terms of population as well as area. In 1976, a special census was performed for the purposes of obtaining additional funds from the State. The population then was 6073. We anticipate the State Department of Finance will certify our 1995 population at about 24,186. The average annual growth rate over this 19 year period has been 21 %. While a significant amount of this population was annexed, the majority of the population growth has been a result of new development. Exhibit A depicts the Page 1 Exhibit A 25,000 20,000 15,000 10,000 5,000 0 'estimate Population Growth O CC 4 46. co 22,225 20,735 07‘N r` to 90 91 92 93 94 95* 0 Population POPGRW.XLS Page la Sheet 2 population growth since 1990. The period through 1993 is the end of the high development era, which started in 1988. The balance of the growth is more attributable to our most recent annexations. The San Jacinto Valley was one of the last areas into the recession. Although an economic recovery has begun in California, we will be one of the last areas to see the recovery, due to our geographic location. The level of building permit activity has fallen to early 1980's levels. Home prices have collapsed to about 1985 pricing. Exhibit B shows the growth in area of the City since 1990. Aggressive annexation activity has resulted in the incorporation of most of our Sphere of Influence into our City limits. There is currently one more annexation in process which might be finished in 1995. This annexation includes the unincorporated area north of the City, along San Jacinto Ave and Alessandro Avenue, as well as the Soboba Heights area. Staff is recommending this annexation be allowed to die, notwithstanding its property owner support, because of the continual infrastructure problems in the area. The area of the City has more than doubled since 1990 which is definitely impressive. However, when viewed over the same 19 year period as we viewed the population, we find the City has grown from 3.24 square miles to 26.81 square miles. This is an 827% increase in area while the population grew "only" 398%. REVENUE The General Fund is the operating fund of the City, paying for such services as police, fire, and other general services. The three main sources of revenue for the General Fund are property tax, sales tax, and motor vehicle in -lieu fees. Exhibit C details the General Fund revenues received from 1990 through 1994 and estimates the receipts for 1995. The City also has special funds, such as Gas Tax and Redevelopment. Use of these funds is restricted to the purpose for which they were created. Ideally, but simplistically, all City functions, with the exception of water and sewer, which have their own independent revenue streams and are totally self supporting, should be paid for by the General Fund. To the extent revenues exceed expenditures, the City can either increase the service level and/or build a reserve. If the General Fund is not adequate to pay for City services, other restricted funds can legitimately be charged for services provided by the City. For example, the General Fund is not strong enough to pay for street maintenance personnel. Therefore, the Gas Tax fund reimburses the City for the cost of these personnel. These are noted in our budget as "interfund transfer in." The positive side of being able to charge other funds for services rendered is that the City is able to function as a full service City. The negative perspective is that there is Tess money available to fulfill a fund's purpose. In the example above, the Gas Tax fund has less money available for repaving roadways because it pays for street Page 2 Exhibit B 30 25 20 0 Growth in Area by Square Mileage 90 91 92 93 Exhibit C $5,000,000 $4, 500,000 $4,000,000 $3, 500,000 $3,000,000 52,500,000 52,000,000 $ 1, 500,000 S1,000,000 $ 500,000 SO S5,000,000 54,500,000 54,000,000 53,500,000 $3,000,000 S2,500,000 S2,000,000 51,500,000 51,000,000 5500,000 $0 95 CI Area of City General Fund Revenue (excluding transfers in) Exhibit D 01 rrl NT O 0:).-- tn— t m m CI General Fund Revenue Total General Fund Operating Revenue (including transfers in) N N o m 0 ) 89/90 90/91 91./92 92/93 93/94 94/95* CI General Fund Revenue P iPGRW xts Page 2a Shtet maintenance personnel. Due to General Fund revenues being inadequate to pay for services over the past several years, it has had to have been supplemented by revenue transfers in. Exhibit D shows the total General Fund Revenue as a result of the transfers in. Occasionally, due to either statute or for the purpose of isolating the number of personnel specifically being paid for by a certain fund, personnel will be specifically budgeted to a restricted fund rather than the General Fund. An example of this occurs in the 94-95 budget where two police officers are charged to the CFD 3 Fund. This is an equivalent to a revenue transfer in. Both the General Fund revenues and the revenue transfers in make up the total General Fund operating budget for the City. Exhibits E and F are the revenue picture expressed in terms of General Fund revenue per capita. In order to provide a greater historical perspective, the per capita General Fund revenue in 78-79 was $120.27. If inflation had increased an average of 3% annually between 78-79 and 94-95, (it was probably closer to 6% annually) the City should be receiving $193.00 per capita instead of the $143.30 we are anticipating. Some of the revenue decreases are the result of specific State of California legislative "takings". The following sentences describe several of these "takings". During the time period from 1992 to the present: • the State has imposed booking fees and allowed the County to charge for tax collection administration (SB 2557), • eliminated AB 8 (the Proposition 13 bailout), • eliminated cigarette tax revenue to the cities, • created the Educational Revenue Augmentation Fund (ERAF) (taking $92,430 in 92-93, 303,679 in 93-94, and approximately the same amount in 94-95. This constitutes 40% of our property taxes.), and • eliminated trailer coach fees. The most damaging of these "takes" is the Educational Revenue Augmentation Fund (ERAF.) The supposed purpose of ERAF was to reimburse the State for the AB 8 bailout noted above. Beginning in 78-79, the State began to make AB 8 payments to the cities and counties. In 92-93, this payment was stopped creating $68,500 revenue loss. One estimate indicates the City may have received in the area of $500,000 in total AB 8 funds. Page 3 E _bit E $ 300.00 $250.00 $ 200.00 $150.00 $100.00 $50.00 $0.00 General Fund Revenue Per Capita (excluding transfers in) m 1 rn N N ,� O 0 N rn N — m vi N m Ki H _ ,-+ t — — 0 co O Revenue Per Capita Year 1989/90 1990/91 1991/92 1992/93 1993/94 1994/95* General Fund Revenue $4,563,611 $3,688,330 $3,903,637 $4,531,379 $3,579,491 $3,465,937 Year 1990 1991 1992 1993 1994 1995* 'estimate Exhibit F Population 15,654 17,960 20,735 22,225 23,976 24,186 Revenue Per Capita $291.53 $205.36 $188.26 $203.89 $149.29 $143.30 $ 300.00 $ 250.00 $ 200.00 $150.00 $100.00 $50.00 $0.00 Total General Fund Operating Revenue Per Capita (including transfers in) ten N +Pr- $228.50 $220.23 o N — tm 0 N iri * N In 0 — — - , 0 G\ 00 44 0 N D Revenue Per Capita General Fund Year Revenue 89/90 $4,563,611 90/91 $3,688,330 91/92 $4,566,530 92/93 $5,078,471 93/94 $5,195,671 94/95* $4,975,464 'budget as amended POPGRW.XLS Year 1990 1991 1992 1993 1994 1995* Population 15,654 17,960 20,735 22,225 23,976 24,186 'estimate Page 3a Revenue Per Capita $ 291.53 $205.36 $220.23 $ 228.50 $ 216.70 $205.72 Sheet 3 Based on the ERAF formula, we have already paid the State $699,788, with an obligation to pay them $300,000 per year indefinitely. As a result of the recession, sales tax has also dropped, even though new outlets have opened and the population has increased. The City has taken steps to raise revenues to fight the impact of the economic downturn. Franchise fees have been imposed or increased. CFD #3, the Public Safety special tax on new development, was specifically implemented to pay for police service for the first time (The initial revenues from CFD #3 had been previously banked in a special fund and used infrequently for emergency public safety needs.). Sales and property tax audits were completed. A user fee study was completed and fees for services were created or increased in certain areas. In an effort to bring in new jobs and revenue, the City Council has also implemented an aggressive economic development program. Staff has begun its work on the revenue projections for 95-96. Due to the continued ERAF 'take" by the State (estimated at about $300,000 for 95-96) and uncertain cash flow from asset forfeiture, staff is preliminarily forecasting at least a revenue reduction of $200,000 from 94-95 levels. EXPENDITURES For the purposes of this discussion, staff has broken City expenditures into four broad categories: General Government, Public Safety, Public Works, and Cultural and Recreation. Exhibit G and H shows revenue and expenditure summaries from this year's current budget (adjusted mid -year). You can see from comparing the operating expenditure, to the operating revenues prior to transfers in, how reliant the City is on its special funds. However, we have maximized the legitimate charges we have made to these special funds and no increased amount can be obtained from them. When reserves aren't available or when legitimate charges to other funds can't be made, expenditures have to be trimmed. Over the past several years, the Council has amended the budget mid -year in order to stay within the revenue projections. In many of the cases, services have been either cut or provided at a greater cost to the public. In 91-92, four police positions and one maintenance worker position were kept vacant. In 92-93, funds for conferences and travel expenses were cut for management. Management benefits were also reduced. Capital outlay was deferred where possible. Maintenance and operation items, such as janitorial services, water cooler rentals and coffee supplies were terminated. Part-time and contract personnel were used where possible to avoid the Page 4 need for full-time staff. Contract services were used when savings could be achieved without a reduction in service. Major expenditure reductions were made at the beginning of 93-94. Three employees (in Finance, Public Works, and Community Development) were laid off after PERC voted not to reduce benefits for a year. The remaining three bargaining units elected to keep their staffing levels constant, agreeing to freezes in sick leave and vacation buy back, wages merit increases, specialty pay, life insurance premiums, tuition reimbursement, and uniform allowances. Employees agreed to pay their own optical insurance and long term disability insurance. Additionally, personnel vacancies in the Police Department were not filled, including two officer positions. Positions in the Fire Department and Community Development Department were also eliminated. Overtime was greatly reduced. A small citywide fund was established to provide mandatory/necessary training of employees. In the current fiscal year, the limited conference and travel expenses policy was continued. At mid -year, $85,000 was cut from the budget, mainly by not filling authorized positions in the Police and Public Works Departments. If preliminary revenue projections are correct for FY 95-96, expenditures will need to be reduced by $200,000. Unfortunately, any "fat" that may have existed in the budget has already been cut in past years. In fact, it would be advisable to restore some training in order to allow staff to stay current in their fields. The only other cuts possible are in personnel, which would reduce service further than it has already been reduced. As you can see in both Exhibits G and H, Public Safety services take up a significant portion of the General Fund budget. The Council has previously discussed the need to reduce this percentage in order to be able to fund other necessary positions. LEVELS OF SERVICE The ability to provide service is determined by a number of factors which interact with one another. These factors include, but are not limited to: the priorities of both the Council and management staff; the number of staff available; the funds available; the demand for service; and the geographic area to be served. The General Government function which we have identified is largely the Council, City Clerk, City Manager, and Finance functions. In 1990, these functions were accomplished with a staff of eight. The demands for service have grown due to both demographic changes and legislative mandates. The staff has grown in response to the increased demand for service through the addition of only the Finance Director. Superficially, it appears that this staff is keeping up with service demands. However, there is a growing Page 5 EXHIBIT G CITY OF SAN JACINTO REVENUE COMPARISON 1994-95 MID -YEAR BUDGET AMENDMENT 10 GENERAL FUND 110 Property Taxes 120 Sales Tax 130 Transient Occupancy 141 Franchises 160 Business License 165 Property Transfer 210 Animal License 212 Bicycle License 221 Construction Permits 225 Resident tnspeciton 237 Mobile Home Permits 250 Other Licence/Perrnrts 330 Fines & Forfeits 335 Parking Citations 410 Interest 440 Rents & Leases 505 Motor Vehicle License 509 Trailer Coach Fee 510 H.P. Tax Relief 529 P.O.S.T. 595 Hwy Carrier In -Lieu 601 Planning Fees 605 Kiok Sign Program 611 Contractor License Verif 615 Police Fees 620 Sewer Permits 621 Alarm Response Fee 625 Fire Fees 630 Plan Check Fees 645 Engineering Fees 650 P.W. Permits 660 Weed/Lot Abatements 665 Vehicle Abatement 694 Swimming Pool Fees 701 Sale Of Property 745 Contributions 746 School DARE Program 675 Senior Citiz Donations 780 Waste Reduction/Recycle 791 Other Revenue 5011 Inter -Fund Transfer -In TOTAL REVENUE 1 ASSET FORFEITURE (POLICE) 5011 Inter -Fund Transfer -In ACTUAL 1994-95 REVENUE ADOPTED TO 2/28/95 REVENUE 315,647 765,393 480,165 683,419 5,599 6,364 628,323 628.323 86,664 108,881 14,041 21,863 1,961 2,974 54 255 98,744 75,000 0 0 10,248 10,370 835 595 697 10,000 11,784 36,000 48,964 32,056 22,076 40,099 555,301 749,230 0 10,145 0 47,278 16,917 69,750 3,498 4,799 16,304 12,000 0 0 7,550 1,800 22,130 12,859 32 600 1,016 7,066 3,898 0 55.936 8,400 0 0 51,008 4,800 7,262 36,700 7,706 17,000 0 0 0 10,015 434 1,756 0 0 0 707 0 10,471 23,414 80,062 1,006,351 1,509.527 3,504,559 5,016,557 1994-95 MID YEAR PROJECTION 580,874 683.419 8,399 641,086 108,881 21,863 2,974 90 118,000 0 10,370 1,250 1,413 40,565 66,878 40,099 815,000 150 14,027 47,980 4,799 18,304 0 8,750 25,130 32 1,016 4,100 65,000 0 55,000 14,525 12,000 4.000 10,015 1,756 0 500 0 37,692 1,509,527 4.975,464 REVENUE INCREASE (DECREASE) (184,519) 0 2,035 12,763 0 0 0 (165) 43,000 0 0 655 (8,587) 4,565 34,822 0 65,770 (9,995) (33,251) (21,770) 0 6,304 0 6.950 12,271 (568) (6,050) 4,100 56,600 0 50.200 (22,175) (5.000) 4.000 0 0 0 (207) (10,471) (42,370) 0 (41,093) 0 0 40,000 40.000 Page 5a EXHIBIT H CITY OF SAN JACINTO 1994-95 MID -YEAR BUDGET AMENDMENT ACTUAL 1994-95 1994-95 BUDGET EXPENDITURES ADOPTED MID YEAR INCREASE GENERAL FUND TO 2/28/95 BUDGET PROJECTION (DECREASE) 1100 CITY COUNCIL 15,139 28,640 24,640 (4,000) 1110 CITY CLERK 36,617 54,550 56,457 1,907 1111 CITY ATTORNEY 60,430 120,000 115,000 (5,000) 1200 CITY MANAGER 128,149 203,217 195,219 (7,998) 1210 HUMAN RESOURCES 33,066 49,467 49,467 0 1400 FINANCE 152,992 225,012 228,012 3,000 1410 CITY TREASURER 1,318 1,938 1,938 0 1700 COM DEV - PLANNING 242,445 366,538 366,538 0 2500 NON -DEPARTMENTAL 88,970 199,022 207,020 7,998 2550 COMMUNITY PROMOTION 2,560 6,000 6,000 0 3100 POLICE 1,430,978 2,273,621 2,214,621 (59,000) Inter -Fund Transfers -Out 0 0 40,000 40,000 3200 FIRE SUPPRESSION 483,637 742,038 738,438 (3,600) 3210 FIRE PREVENTION 126,724 158.716 158,716 0 3220 FIRE-EMRGNCY PREPARD 0 6,000 6.000 0 3300 COMM DEV-BLDG 8 SAFET 44,526 66,494 65,044 (1,450) 4100 PUBLIC WORKS - ADMIN 65.501 97,753 97.753 0 4150 PUBLIC WORKS - MAINT 217,937 361,554 344,754 (16,800) 6100 MUSEUM 5,554 7,635 7,635 0 7400 COMMUNITY CENTER 22,074 37,785 37,785 0 8400 SWIMMING POOL 4,833 10,650 14,500 3.850 TOTAL APPROPRIATIONS 3,163,450 5.016,630 4,975.537 (41,093) Page 5b backlog in the Finance and City Clerk functions that can only be eliminated by hiring more personnel, at a cost of approximately $55,000. In this category, as well as Community Development, volunteers augment our staff. The Public Safety service issues are complex and will be discussed in more detail in later sections. A brief summary is in order here. In 1990, the Police Department had 28 sworn officers or 1.8 per 1000 people. The current sworn staffing numbers 25, which is less than one officer per 1000 people. To bring the Department back to 1990 ratios would cost approximately 1.5 million dollars. A more modest ratio of 1.3 would cost about one-third less. Obviously, the demands for service have increased with the demographic changes. Unfortunately, there has been a reduction in services provided due to lack of staffing as will be seen later. The Fire Department has also seen a decline in service levels due to our lack of revenue. The current staffing is identical to that of 1990. However, there was a two year period in which the apprentice program allowed us to field a second unit. Due to the demographic changes noted above, the declines in service have been both a reduction in response time as well as an elimination of some services, such as opening car doors when someone has locked their keys in the car. There is a need both to increase the staff and to seriously consider the construction of a second station. The funds necessary to achieve the staffing needs are an extra $700,000 on average. Public Works, for the purposes of this memo, includes the Community Development Department. Staffing in Community Development has been reduced by two since 1990. While development activity has fallen off, there is still enough activity to cause services to be reduced. Inspections for miscellaneous permits such as awnings are limited to five per day in order to allow enough time for inspections of new development and plan check. An inspector is available to answer questions at the counter or on the phone no more than two hours a day. When the inspector is off, we scramble to be sure there is some coverage. Rarely, does the office staff have time to work on backlogged projects. To address these service deficiencies would take an expenditure of approximately $64,000. In 1990, the Public Works Department had 11 staff members, which included two mechanics and one secretary/dispatcher. This fiscal year the maximum staffing has been nine, which included a mechanic. The actual staffing needs of the department based on miles of roadway, signing and striping needs, road shoulder work required, miles of sewer, the number of vehicles in the fleet, the number of trees and streetlights, and the other miscellaneous jobs performed, is approximately 18. The estimated cost to double the staff is $300,000. The expenditures for Cultural and Recreation categories, which includes the museum, pool, and Community Center, have been cut in half between 1990 and the present. Page 6 Fortunately, we receive a lot of volunteer hours at the Community Center which has allowed us to keep the expenditures low. They probably should be returned to 1990 levels, requiring the expenditure of an additional $56,000. In summary, there is a legitimate need to increase staffing to provide adequate service, similar to 1990 levels. However, it would take approximately $1,620,000 in additional expenditures, or $66.98 per person, in order to achieve this level. This cost does not include any assumptions for capital costs necessary to house and outfit these new employees. We also have not attempted to quantify in this section or the previous sections the impact of state and federal mandates on our service level of finances, although there is a definite impact. The following two sections give more detail on the more complex needs of public safety, about which the citizens typically are most concerned. POLICE DISCUSSION Background The San Jacinto Police Department presently operates at a staffing level of 25 sworn officers (1.0 officers per 1,000 population) and 10 civilian personnel. Since 1990, we have dropped from 28 sworn officers (1.8 officers per 1,000 pop) to our current level. During this same time span, the city population has increased from 15,654 to the current 24,186. The number of incidents handled by the department has increased from 19,186 in 1990 to 26,060 in 1994. The below statistics illustrate our changes in ability to deliver service; FISCAL # SWORN ACTUAL RATIO PER POPULATION INCIDENTS YEAR OFFICERS SWORN 1,000 POP HANDLED 1990 28 28 1.8 15,654 19,186 1991 25 25 1.4 17,960 19,765 1992 26 23 1.1 20,735 19,201* 1993 26 24 1.0 22,225 24,184 1994 25 25 1.0 23,971 26,060 1995 24,186 27, 552** * This decrease in incidents from the prior year could relate to our change in method of capturing statistics, (from county system to our own) or the number of officers actually on staff. ** Projection is based upon 1st 3 months of 1995. Page 7 As you can see, the trend can and does erode the ability of the police department to effectively deal with crime problems and provide quality service to the community. There are several shortfalls in service which we have experienced as our staffing level diminished. One that we noted that we are averaging just over 3 hours of no officer available time per 24 hour period. These were periods of time when all officers were occupied with other activity and were unavailable to respond immediately to another incident. This caused call stacking (stacking calls in order of priority) where callers were advised that we would send an officer when one was available. Additionally, over the years, we have also deleted civilian positions to maintain the sworn level of service as high as possible. As our ability to provide service has decreased we have made changes in the method of doing business to compensate for these shortages in sworn staff. We have implemented the dictation services, designed to provide an officer with more time on the street as opposed to down time writing reports. We have also had to reduce the hours wherein we would respond to lobby walk in type services (ie; fingerprinting, sex and drug registrations, vehicle releases etc). The police department have also restructured in an attempt to eliminate mid -management levels, while maintaining street level and first line supervision. There are three scenarios which we can foresee in which to deal with the police department, a) maintain our current number of personnel, b) maintain our current ratio of officers per thousand population (1.0), c) or reach a ratio of officers to population which is reasonable such as 1.3 per thousand. A discussion of these follow. MAINTAIN CURRENT STAFFING LEVEL If we chose to maintain the police department at 25 officers and 10 civilians, there are a number of things which will occur and there are known actions which we must take to deal with them. One problem we are presently experiencing at this staffing level is that we have time spans in each day (average of 3.75 hours per day) where we have no officers immediately available to respond to calls. (Our survey was conducted for a three week period of time and ranged from a low of 1 hour 24 minutes to a high of 8 hours and 26 minutes per 24 hour period.) We know, of course, that the population will continue to increase (minus a no -growth initiative by the Council), and thus the number of incidents we handle will increase. To deal with the increases in calls and population, we will have to make a number of significant decreases in service. These cutbacks of service could include such things as us no longer responding to traffic collisions, crime reports by appointment, and may reach a level of only responding to serious crimes in progress. A danger of electing to go this route or the one listed below is the employee burnout and injury rate which could be anticipated to increase with an insufficient staffing level. Page 8 MAINTAIN CURRENT RATIO OF OFFICERS PER POPULATION Based on the present staffing level of 25 officers, our current ratio is 1.0 officer per 1,000 population. Assuming that the decision was made to remain at this level of staffing as our population grows, our staffing level would equivalently grow. However, even at this level, we may still have to implement some of the above mentioned reductions in service, and are currently exploring these in anticipation of possible reductions in funding sources. Should funding not be available to maintain the police department staffing level, cuts in areas such as animal control, and D.A.R.E. should be first considered. Any cutback in services would of course be stretched out over a greater time span and the reductions would, hopefully, not be as drastic as in the maintenance of staffing level scenario. If the percentage of the police department budget was reduced to approximately 63% of the general fund budget, we would need additional revenue in excess of $300,000 per year, to maintain our current ratio of 1.0 officers per 1,000 population. ESTABLISH A BETTER RATIO OF OFFICERS PER POPULATION Current FBI statistics indicate that cities of our size in the Southwestern United States have a ratio of 1.5 officers per 1,000 population. As a city grows this ratio decreases and stabilizes at about 1.3 officers per 1,000 population. Should we elect to achieve and maintain this level of service to the community, we should be able to reasonably deal with crime problems and to provide the community with adequate police services. It is recommended that we attain a staffing level of 1.3 officers per 1,000 population. This is determined by taking into account the current size of the city (land area and population), the number of incidents handled (1994 = 26,000+), and the nature of the criminal activity encountered. This staffing level would enable the city to incorporate a plan to transition to Community Oriented Policing/Government over the next two years and expect to be reasonably successful. Should we elect to attain this level of staffing, we would need close to $800,000 per year in additional funding. POLICE FACILITY The present police facility is approximately 6,500 sq. ft. The Ralph Anderson & Assoc. police service impact model, authorized by the City Council, recommends that a police facility have 550 sq. ft. per patrol officer. Based upon that assumption, we should have a facility of approximately 9,900 sq. ft. Almost half of the present facility consists of mobile offices which are on a lease basis ($20,000. per yr) and we will never own them. (This agreement was entered into during prior city management when a permanent facility was projected.) To reach the recommendations in the impact model, we would need to replace Page 9 the mobile offices, (3120 sq. ft.) with permanent buildings and add an additional 3,400 sq. ft. The cost to build this 6,500 sq. ft. @ $50. per sq. ft. would be about $325,000 if we had the space to add on. This would be to just meet our current needs. A facility to house the police department and to fulfill the needs of the community for the next 20 years is projected to cost between $9 and $12 million. The cost varies depending on the staffing direction the Council elects to take, regardless of which, we have outgrown our current facility, and have limited room for expansion on the present site. To service the sort of debt which would finance a facility of this type would cost almost $1.5 million per year for 20 years. FIRE DISCUSSION Staffing During the last five years, the Fire Department has experienced some growth in staffing and then a recent decline, due to the elimination of the Apprentice Program. The staffing level peaked in 1993 and 1994 with a three man engine company and a two man squad in service at the same time. Listed below is a chart to reflect these figures: YEAR TOTAL PERSONNEL TOTAL SHIFT MANNING NUMBER OF CALLS POPULATION 1990 9 3 2176 15654 1991 9 3 2456 17960 1992 12 3 TO 5 2590 20735 1993 15 5 2645 22225 1994 15 4 TO 3 2494 23976 1995 9 3 2654(Estimated) 24186(Estimated) In 1994, the Fire Department experienced a reduction in calls from the previous year. There were 6.83 calls per day in 1994. Since January we are averaging 7.27 calls per day, which, if continued, would total approximately 2654 calls in 1995. The decrease in 1994 could have been caused by a reduction in our winter population, but we do not have the information available to verify that. The Hemet Fire Department experienced a similar decrease in the number of calls they responded to last year. The major impact on the service level of the Fire Department, has been the reduction in the number of units responding to calls. When the Department had two units in service to respond on calls, even though they were both stationed at the same location, there was always a second unit available, every time one of the units was committed to a call. With one unit available for calls, as we are staffed today, each time the unit is Page 10 committed on a call, the next available unit is dispatched on a mutual aid basis from an adjoining agency. The net effect is an increase in our average response time to emergency calls. The manning reduction also reduces our effectiveness at larger emergencies that require more manpower, until the arrival of mutual aid units. Some other impacts on the service level that the reduction of manpower has created are: ► The ability to conduct necessary training, while still remaining in service for emergency calls. ► The ability to provide comprehensive engine company inspections. ► Our availability for public education programs. ► The completion of routine maintenance on equipment. The direct impact on these functions is difficult to quantify, but have an impact none the less. In an attempt to offset some of the impacts of declining manpower that affect our service level, the Fire Department has participated in training programs developed by the Hemet Fire Department. In order to accomplish this, Hemet has sent an unit to cover our response area while we are training. We also recently eliminated some of the Public Service type calls we had been responding to, which leaves our single engine available more of the time for emergency calls. In order to establish a reasonable staffing pattern, I conducted a survey of some other cities in Riverside County to compare manning levels and station numbers. The results are listed below. San Jacinto Banning 1 Norco Mumeta Indio Cathedral City Population 24,000 23,000 25,000 32,000 42,000 35,000 Square Miles 25 22 15 26 21 29 Number of Stations 1 2 2 3 3 3 Annual Calls 2,500 2,800 1,600 1,600 3,000 3,000 Total Personnel 11 24 26 25 35 34 Page 11 San Jacinto Banning Norco Murrieta Indio Cathedral City Manning per Shift 3 5 8 7 8 10 Total Units Responding 1 2 3 3 4 5 Firefighters Per 1,000 Population .46 1.09 1.04 .78 .83 .97 Total Budget $904,983 $1,700,000 $1,850,000 $2,600,000 $3,173,000 $3,125,918 It is apparent by comparing the statistics from other cities, that San Jacinto is providing Fire Services at a much lower level of manpower and funding than other cities in Riverside County. In studying the cost of opening a second Fire Station in two years, and increasing the manning to six personnel per shift over the next ten years, I have estimated there will be a shortfall of almost seven million dollars over that ten year period (see matrix below). If the second Fire Station were opened, and each shift was staffed by six personnel, the number of Firefighters per 1,000 population would become .67 at today's population figure. If the population increases by 10,000 people over the next ten years to 34,000, the ratio of Firefighters per 1,000 would be .56 which is still well below the average of those cities used for comparison. Year Suppression Manning Shift Manning Additional Cost Revenue Required General Fund * Shortfall 1995/96 12 4 $325,934 $1,066,864 $714,694 ($352,170) 1996/97 15 5 $391,297 $1,458,161 $743,282 ($714,879) 1997/98 15 5 $1,458,161 $773,013 ($685,148) 1998/99 15 5 $1,458,161 $803,934 ($654,227) 1999/2000 18 6 $217,080 $1,675,241 $836,091 ($839,150) 2000/2001 18 6 $1,675,241 $869,535 ($805,706) 2001/2002 18 6 $1,675,241 $904,316 ($770,925) 2002/2003 18 6 $1,675,241 $940,489 ($734,752) 2003/2004 18 6 $1,675,241 $978,108 ($697,133) 2004/2005 18 6 $1,675,241 $1,017,232 ($658,009) 10 Year Shortfall ($6,912,100) Page 12 ' Assumes 4% Increase per Year from 94-95 levels. In 1996/97, a Fire Station would be added. The additional cost of the operation of the Fire Station is included. A Fire Mitigation Fee is collected on all new commercial and residential construction to fund future Fire facilities. There would not be enough in the fund by 1996/97 to build a new station and buy a new engine, estimated to cost approximately one million dollars, so some type of financing would be required. Future mitigation fees collected could repay the debt. It is apparent that to increase the Fire Department resources to an acceptable level will require some additional type of funding to augment our portion of the general fund revenues. CONCLUSION In summary, the General Fund revenues available to the City Council are not keeping up with necessary service levels and demands. Due to the continued recession in this area, as well as federal and state revenue reductions/mandates to local government, this gap between revenues and service levels also looks like it is going to continue or even increase. In trying to close this gap, the City Council and staff need to continue to find ways to be efficient and as cost effective as possible. We need to continue to evaluate our services and how most efficiently we can perform them, whether that be by contract, consolidation or City provided. However, even with this, the gap between service levels and revenues is too great to be made up only by efficient service delivery. Especially if the Council wants to increase police, fire or public works service levels, the Council may wish to consider the development of other revenue sources. In researching the options you might have available, there appear to be two: • The first would be the implementation of a Utility User's tax. This is a charge on one or more utilities to raise revenue for general government purposes. The rate can be a flat rate or a percentage of the bill. Because this is revenue for general government, the Council can only commit the revenue raised to a specific function on an annual basis. This means that if the Council enacted a Utility User's tax because it wanted to have more police officers or public works personnel, it can make that pledge, but only annually, through its budget, could allocate the funds as they saw fit. To enact this tax, a simple majority vote of the City Council is necessary. A vote of the people is not required. • The second action and the only other one of which staff is aware of, would allow dedication of funds for a specific purpose. This alternative places a special assessment on parcels after a two-third's affirmative vote of the electorate. The Page 13 rate for this method is determined by the Council and is put on the ballot for a vote. NEXT STEPS The City Council needs to provide staff direction on, if and how, you would like to proceed with this issue. If the Council is interested in exploring one or both of the previously discussed revenue options, Council should give direction to the staff on the timeline in which they would like to see this discussed, what outreach should be done, and the service levels that you would like to see established or improved. The Council may wish to appoint a Council ad hoc committee to work with the staff to work on this issue and make recommendations to the full Council. Page 14 TO: AG NDA7•7 Staff Report Honorable Mayor and Members of the City Council FROM: Brian McNabb, Director of Community Development Nathaniel Holmes III, Police Chief Gene Price, Interim Fire Chief Rod Butler, Assistant to the City Manager Larry Weaver, Interim Finance Director Via: Pamela S. Easter, City Manager DATE: May 2, 1995 RE: General Fund and Service Level Issues RECOMMENDATION: Receive for information and provide erection to staff, as appropriate. ir At the City Council meeting of April 18th, staff was directed to review service levels of the City, particularly as they relate to public safety services, in light of the revenue loss caused directly (i.e. fewer building permits) and indirectly (i.e. State revenue deductions) by the recession. This report is an attempt to condense a very complex issue to a few pages. In order to adequately address the subject, the report is broken into various sections so the Council and public can see demographic and revenue trends; the efforts made to reduce expenditures; and, the changes in service levels. "Staff has included a look back over the last five years to identify the historical trends; developed some preliminary estimates for Fiscal Year 95-96; and, in some cases, looked as much as ten years into the future. DEMOGRAPHICS The City has experienced a significant amount of growth in the past twenty years. This growth can be measured both in terms of population as well as area. In 1976, a special census was performed for the purposes of obtaining additional funds from the State. The population then was 6073. We anticipate the State Department of Finance will certify our 1995 population at about 24,186. The average annual growth rate over this 19 year period has been 2.1%. While a significant amount of this population was annexed, the majority of the population growth has been a result of new development. Exhibit A depicts the Exhibit A 25,000 20,000 15,000 10,000 5,000 0 'estimate Population Growth ,r,, p. sn c i r+ CO :. c. r- r-E 90 91 92 93 94 95* Population POPGRW.XLS Page la Sheet 2 population growth since 1990. The period through 1993 is the end of the high development era, which started in 1988. The balance of the growth is more attributable to our most recent annexations. The San Jacinto Valley was one of the last areas into the recession. Although an economic recovery has begun in California, we will be one of the last areas to see the recovery, due to our geographic location. The level of building permit activity has fallen to early 1980's levels. Home prices have collapsed to about 1985 pricing. Exhibit B shows the growth in area of the City since 1990. Aggressive annexation activity has resulted in the incorporation of most of our Sphere of Influence into our City limits. There is currently one more annexation in process which might be finished in 1995. This annexation includes the unincorporated area north of the City, along San Jacinto Ave and Alessandro Avenue, as well as the Soboba Heights area. Staff is recommending this annexation be allowed to die, notwithstanding its property owner support, because of the continual infrastructure problems in the area. The area of the City has more than doubled since 1990 which is definitely impressive. However, when viewed over the same 19 year period as we viewed the population, we find the City has grown from 3.24 square miles to 26.81 square miles. This is an 827% increase in area while the population grew "only" 398%. REVENUE The General Fund is the operating fund of the City, paying for such services as police, fire, and other general services. The three main sources of revenue for the General Fund are property tax, sales tax, and motor vehicle in -lieu fees. Exhibit C details the General Fund revenues received from 1990 through 1994 and estimates the receipts for 1995. The City also has special funds, such as Gas Tax and Redevelopment. Use of these funds is restricted to the purpose for which they were created. Ideally, but simplistically, all City functions, with the exception of water and sewer, which have their own independent revenue streams and are totally self supporting, should be paid for by the General Fund. To the extent revenues exceed expenditures, the City can either increase the service level and/or build a reserve. If the General Fund is not adequate to pay for City services, other restricted funds can legitimately be charged for services provided by the City. For example, the General Fund is not strong enough to pay for street maintenance personnel. Therefore, the Gas Tax fund reimburses the City for the cost of these personnel. These are noted in our budget as "interfund transfer in." The positive side of being able to charge other funds for services rendered is that the City is able to function as a full service City. The negative perspective is that there is less money available to fulfill a fund's purpose. In the example above, the Gas Tax fund has less money available for repaving roadways because it pays for street Page 2 1 Fxh tbit B 30 25 20 15 10 5 0 Grow-th in Area by Square Mileage 90 91 92 r.d4 03 93 r—t 0) r•tr MS 94 95 CI Area of City Exhibit C $ 5,000,000 $4,500,000 $4,000,000 $3,500,000 $3,000,000 $2,500,000 $2,000,000 $1,500,000 $1,000,000 $500,000 $0 'estimate General Fund Revenue (excluding transfers in) nrs ^NI CA, rfl II- C:3General Fund Revenue ibit D $5,000,000 $4,500,000 54,000,000 $3,500,000 $3,000,000 $2,500,000 $2,000,000 $1,500,000 51,000,000 $500,000 $0 Total General Fund Operating Revenue (including transfers in) Go 89/90 90/91 91/92 92/93 93/94 94/95' 0 General Fund Revenue POPGRW.XLS Page 2a Sheer 2 maintenance personnel. Due to General Fund revenues being inadequate to pay for services over the past several years, it has had to have been supplemented by revenue transfers in. Exhibit D shows the total General Fund Revenue as a result of the transfers in. Occasionally, due to either statute or for the purpose of isolating the number of personnel specifically being paid for by a certain fund, personnel will be specifically budgeted to a restricted fund rather than the General Fund. An example of this occurs in the 94-95 budget where two police officers are charged to the CFD 3 Fund. This is an equivalent to a revenue transfer in. Both the General Fund revenues and the revenue transfers in make up the total General Fund operating budget for the City. Exhibits E and F are the revenue picture expressed in terms of General Fund revenue per capita. In order to provide a greater historical perspective, the per capita General Fund revenue in 78-79 was $120.27. If inflation had increased an average of 3% annually between 78-79 and 94-95, (it was probably closer to 6% annually) the City should be receiving $193.00 per capita instead of the $143.30 we are anticipating. Some of the revenue decreases are the result of specific State of California legislative "takings". The following sentences describe several of these "takings". During the time period from 1992 to the present: • the State has imposed booking fees and allowed the County to charge for tax collection administration (SB 2557), • eliminated AB 8 (the Proposition 13 bailout), • eliminated cigarette tax revenue to the cities, • created the Educational Revenue Augmentation Fund (ERAF) (taking $92,430 in 92-93, 303,679 in 93-94, and approximately the same amount in 94-95. This constitutes 40% of our property taxes.), and • eliminated trailer coach fees. The most damaging of these "takes" is the Educational Revenue Augmentation Fund (ERAF.) The supposed purpose of ERAF was to reimburse the State for the AB 8 bailout noted above. Beginning in 78-79, the State began to make AB 8 payments to the cities and counties. In 92-93, this payment was stopped creating $68,500 revenue loss. One estimate indicates the City may have received in the area of $500,000 in total AB 8 funds. Page 3 I I dbit E • • $300.00 $250.00 $ 200.00 $150.00 $100.00 $ 50.00 $0.00 General Fund Revenue Per Capita (excluding transfers in) rt ti -fin OCV 0 N fin --fin- N ON y} NO N 4.01 m- - r'i _ 0 0\ CO ON N O\ szp O\ CN O\ ❑Revenue Per Capita Year 1989/90 1990/91 1991/92 1992/93 1993/94 1994/95* General Fund Revenue $4,563,611 $3,688,330 $3,903,637 $4,531,379 $3,579,491 $3,465,937 Year 1990 1991 1992 1993 1994 1995* 'estimate Exhibit F Population 15,654 17,960 20,735 22,225 23,976 24,186 Revenue Per Capita $291.53 $205.36 $188.26 $203.89 $149.29 $143.30 $300.00 $ 250.00 $200.00 $150.00 $100.00 $50.00 $0.00 Total General Fund Operating Revenue Per Capita (including transfers in) i No tr 0 N .64 N vs 0 u, CO N N ve h to 0 00 G�1 cts0 N ON O\ O\ N ON ON G\ • C+1 0\ ❑Revenue Per Capita General Fund Year Revenue 89/90 $4,563,611 90/91 $3,688,330 91/92 $4,566,530 92/93 $5,078,471 93/94 $5,195,671 94/95* $4,975,464 'budget as amended POPGRW.XLS Year 1990 1991 1992 1993 1994 1995* Population 15,654 17,960 20,735 22,225 23,976 24,186 'estimate Page 3a Revenue Per Capita $291.53 $205.36 $220.23 $ 228.50 $ 216.70 $205.72 Sheet 3 Based on the ERAF formula, we have already paid the State $699,788, with an obligation to pay them $300,000 per year indefinitely. As a result of the recession, sales tax has also dropped, even though new outlets have opened and the population has increased. The City has taken steps to raise revenues to fight the impact of the economic downturn. Franchise fees have been imposed or increased. CFD #3, the Public Safety special tax on new development, was specifically implemented to pay for police service for the first time (The initial revenues from CFD #3 had been previously banked in a special fund and used infrequently for emergency public safety needs.). Sales and property tax audits were completed. A user fee study was completed and fees for services were created or increased in certain areas. In an effort to bring in new jobs and revenue, the City Council has also implemented an aggressive economic development program. Staff has begun its work on the revenue projections for 95-96. Due to the continued ERAF "take" by the State (estimated at about $300,000 for 95-96) and uncertain cash flow from asset forfeiture, staff is preliminarily forecasting at least a revenue reduction of $200,000 from 94-95 levels. EXPENDITURES For the purposes of this discussion, staff has broken City expenditures into four broad categories: General Government, Public Safety, Public Works, and Cultural and Recreation. Exhibit G and H shows revenue and expenditure summaries from this year's current budget (adjusted mid -year). You can see from comparing the operating expenditure, to the operating revenues prior to transfers in, how reliant the City is on its special funds. However, we have maximized the legitimate charges we have made to these special funds and no increased amount can be obtained from them. When reserves aren't available or when legitimate charges to other funds can't be made, expenditures have to be trimmed. Over the past several years, the Council has amended the budget mid -year in order to stay within the revenue projections. In many of the cases, services have been either cut or provided at a greater cost to the public. In 91-92, four police positions and one maintenance worker position were kept vacant. In 92-93, funds for conferences and travel expenses were cut for management. Management benefits were also reduced. Capital outlay was deferred where possible. Maintenance and operation items, such as janitorial services, water cooler rentals and coffee supplies were terminated. Part-time and contract personnel were used where possible to avoid the Page 4 1 1 1 c c • • need for full-time staff. Contract services were used when savings could be achieved without a reduction in service. Major expenditure reductions were made at the beginning of 93-94. Three employees (in Finance, Public Works, and Community Development) were laid off after PERC voted not to reduce benefits for a year. The remaining three bargaining units elected to keep their staffing levels constant, agreeing to freezes in sick leave and vacation buy back, wages merit increases, specialty pay, life insurance premiums, tuition reimbursement, and uniform allowances. Employees agreed to pay their own optical insurance and long term disability insurance. Additionally, personnel vacancies in the Police Department were not filled, including two officer positions. Positions in the Fire Department and Community Development Department were also eliminated. Overtime was greatly reduced. A small citywide fund was established to provide mandatory/necessary training of employees. In the current fiscal year, the limited conference and travel expenses policy was continued. At mid -year, $85,000 was cut from the budget, mainly by not filling authorized positions in the Police and Public Works Departments. If preliminary revenue projections are correct for FY 95-96, expenditures will need to be reduced by $200,000. Unfortunately, any "fat" that may have existed in the budget has already been cut in past years. In fact, it would be advisable to restore some training in order to allow staff to stay current in their fields. The only other cuts possible are in personnel, which would reduce service further than it has already been reduced. As you can see in both Exhibits G and H, Public Safety services take up a significant portion of the General Fund budget. The Council has previously discussed the need to reduce this percentage in order to be able to fund other necessary positions. LEVELS OF SERVICE The ability to provide service is determined by a number of factors which interact with one another. These factors include, but are not limited to: the priorities of both the Council and management staff; the number of staff available; the funds available; the demand for service; and the geographic area to be served. The General Government function which we have identified is largely the Council, City Clerk, City Manager, and Finance functions. In 1990, these functions were accomplished with a staff of eight. The demands for service have grown due to both demographic changes and legislative mandates. The staff has grown in response to the increased demand for service through the addition of only the Finance Director. Superficially, it appears that this staff is keeping up with service demands. However, there is a growing Page 5 EXHIBIT G CITY OF SAN JACINTO REVENUE COMPARISON 1994-95 MID -YEAR BUDGET AMENDMENT 10 GENERAL FUND 110 Property Taxes 120 Sales Tax 130 Transient Occupancy 141 Franchises 160 Business License 165 Property Transfer 210 Animal License 212 Bicycle License 221 Construction Permits 225 Resident Inspeciton 237 Mobile Home Permits 250 Other Licence/Permits 330 Fines & Forfeits 335 Parking Citations 410 Interest 440 Rents & Leases 505 Motor Vehicle License 509 Trailer Coach Fee 510 H.P. Tax Relief 529 P.O.S.T. 595 Hwy Carrier In -Lieu 601 Planning Fees 605 Kiok Sign Program 611 Contractor License Verif 615 Police Fees 620 Sewer Permits 621 .Alarm Response Fee 625 Fire Fees 630 Plan Check Fees 645 Engineering Fees 650 P.W. Permits 660 Weed/Lot Abatements 665 Vehicle Abatement 694 Swimming Pool Fees 701 Sale Of Property 745 Contributions 746 School DARE Program 675 Senior Citiz Donations 780 Waste Reduction/Recycle 791 Other Revenue 5011 Inter -Fund Transfer -In TOTAL REVENUE ACTUAL 1994-95 1994-95 REVENUE REVENUE ADOPTED MID YEAR INCREASE TO 2/28/95 REVENUE PROJECTION (DECREASE) 315,647 765,393 580,874 480,165 683.419 683,419 5.599 6,364 8,399 628,323 628,323 641,086 86,664 108,881 108,881 14,041 21,863 21,863 1,961 2,974 2,974 54 255 90 98,744 75,000 118,000 0 0 0 10,248 10,370 10,370 835 595 1,250 697 10,000 1,413 11,784 36,000 40,565 48,964 32.056 66,878 22.076 40,099 40,099 555,301 749,230 815,000 0 10,145 150 0 47,278 14,027 16,917 69,750 47,980 3,498 4,799 4,799 16,304 12,000 18,304 0 0 0 7.550 1,800 8,750 22,130 12.859 25,130 32 600 32 1,016 7,066 1,016 3,898 0 4,100 55.936 8.400 65.000 0 0 0 51,008 4,800 55.000 7,262 36,700 14,525 7,706 17,000 12,000 0 0 4.000 0 10,015 10,015 434 1,756 1,756 0 0 0 0 707 500 0 10,471 0 23,414 80,062 37,692 1,006,351 1,509.527 1.509,527 3.504.559 5.016.557 4.975,464 (184,519) 0 2,035 12,763 0 0 0 (165) 43,000 0 0 655 (8,587) 4,565 34,822 0 65,770 (9,995) (33,251) (21,770) 0 6,304 0 6,950 12,271 (568) (6,050) 4,100 56,600 0 50.200 (22,175) (5.000) 4,000 0 0 0 (207) (10,471) (42,370) 0 (41.093) ). ASSET FORFEITURE (POLICE) 5011 Inter -Fund Transfer -In 0 0 40.000 40.000 Page 5a c • • EXHIBIT H CITY OF SAN JACINTO 1994-95 MID -YEAR BUDGET AMENDMENT ACTUAL 1994-95 1994-95 BUDGET EXPENDITURES ADOPTED MID YEAR INCREASE GENERAL FUND TO 2/28/95 BUDGET PROJECTION (DECREASE) 1100 CITY COUNCIL 15,139 28.640 24,640 (4,000) 1110 CITY CLERK 36,617 54,550 56,457 1,907 1111 CITY ATTORNEY 60,430 120,000 115,000 (5,000) 1200 CITY MANAGER 128,149 203217 195,219 (7,998) 1210 HUMAN RESOURCES 33.066 49,467 49,467 0 1400 FINANCE 152,992 225,012 228,012 3,000 1410 CITY TREASURER 1,318 1,938 1,938 0 1700 COM DEV - PLANNING 242,445 366,538 366,538 0 2500 NON -DEPARTMENTAL 88,970 199,022 207,020 7.998 2550 COMMUNITY PROMOTION 2.560 6.000 6.000 0 3100 POLICE 1,430,978 2,273,621 2,214,621 (59,000) Inter -Fund Transfers -Out 0 0 40,000 40,000 3200 FIRE SUPPRESSION 483,637 742,038 738,438 (3,600) 3210 FIRE PREVENTION 126.724 158.716 158,716 0 3220 FIRE-EMRGNCY PREPARD 0 6,000 6.000 0 3300 COMM DEV-BLDG & SAFET 44,526 66,494 65,044 (1,450) 4100 PUBLIC WORKS - ADMIN 65.501 97,753 97.753 0 4150 PUBLIC WORKS - MAINT 217,937 361.554 344,754 (16.800) 6100 MUSEUM 5,554 7,635 7,635 0 7400 COMMUNITY CENTER 22,074 37,785 37,785 0 8400 SWIMMING POOL 4,833 10.650 14.500 3.850 TOTAL APPROPRIATIONS 3.163.450 5.016.630 4.975.537 (41.093) Page 5b backlog in the Finance and City Clerk functions that can only be eliminated by hiring more personnel, at a cost of approximately $55,000. In this category, as well as Community Development, volunteers augment our staff. The Public Safety service issues are complex and will be discussed in more detail in later sections. A brief summary is in order here. In 1990, the Police Department had 28 sworn officers or 1.8 per 1000 people. The current sworn staffing numbers 25, which is Tess than one officer per 1000 people. To bring the Department back to 1990 ratios would cost approximately 1.5 million dollars. A more modest ratio of 1.3 would cost about one-third less. Obviously, the demands for service have increased with the demographic changes. Unfortunately, there has been a reduction in services provided due to lack of staffing as will be seen later. The Fire Department has also seen a decline in service levels due to our lack of revenue. The current staffing is identical to that of 1990. However, there was a two year period in which the apprentice program allowed us to field a second unit. Due to the demographic changes noted above, the declines in service have been both a reduction in response time as well as an elimination of some services, such as opening car doors when someone has locked their keys in the car. There is a need both to increase the staff and to seriously consider the construction of a second station. The funds necessary to achieve the staffing needs are an extra $700,000 on average. Public Works, for the purposes of this memo, includes the Community Development Department. Staffing in Community Development has been reduced by two since 1990. While development activity has fallen off, there is still enough activity to cause services to be reduced. Inspections for miscellaneous permits such as awnings are limited to five per day in order to allow enough time for inspections of new development and plan check. An inspector is available to answer questions at the counter or on the phone no more than two hours a day. When the inspector is off, we scramble to be sure there is some coverage. Rarely, does the office staff have time to work on backlogged projects. To address these service deficiencies would take an expenditure of approximately $64,000. In 1990, the Public Works Department had 11 staff members, which included two mechanics and one secretary/dispatcher. This fiscal year the maximum staffing has been nine, which included a mechanic. The actual staffing needs of the department based on miles of roadway, signing and striping needs, road shoulder work required, miles of sewer, the number of vehicles in the fleet, the number of trees and streetlights, and the other miscellaneous jobs performed, is approximately 18. The estimated cost to double the staff is $300,000. The expenditures for Cultural and Recreation categories, which includes the museum, pool, and Community Center, have been cut in half between 1990 and the present. Page 6 1 4 • • Fortunately, we receive a lot of volunteer hours at the Community Center which has allowed us to keep the expenditures low. They probably should be returned to 1990 levels, requiring the expenditure of an additional $56,000. In summary, there is a legitimate need to increase staffing to provide adequate service, similar to 1990 levels. However, it would take approximately $1,620,000 in additional expenditures, or $66.98 per person, in order to achieve this level. This cost does not include any assumptions for capital costs necessary to house and outfit these new employees. We also have not attempted to quantify in this section or the previous sections the impact of state and federal mandates on our service level of finances, although there is a definite impact. The following two sections give more detail on the more complex needs of public safety, about which the citizens typically are most concerned. POLICE DISCUSSION Background The San Jacinto Police Department presently operates at a staffing level of 25 sworn officers (1.0 officers per 1,000 population) and 10 civilian personnel. Since 1990, we have dropped from 28 sworn officers (1.8 officers per 1,000 pop) to our current level. During this same time span, the city population has increased from 15,654 to the current 24,186. The number of incidents handled by the department has increased from 19,186 in 1990 to 26,060 in 1994. The below statistics illustrate our changes in ability to deliver service; FISCAL # SWORN ACTUAL RATIO PER POPULATION INCIDENTS YEAR OFFICERS SWORN 1.000 POP HANDLED 1990 28 28 1.8 15,654 19,186 ' 1991 25 25 1.4 17,960 19,765 1992 26 23 1.1 20,735 19,201* 1993 26 24 1.0 22,225 24,184 1994 25 25 1.0 23,971 26,060 1995 24,186 27, 552** * This decrease in incidents from the prior year could relate to our change in method of capturing statistics, (from county system to our own) or the number of officers actually on staff. ** Projection is based upon 1st 3 months of 1995. Page 7 As you can see, the trend can and does erode the ability of the police department to effectively deal with crime problems and provide quality service to the community. There are several shortfalls in service which we have experienced as our staffing level diminished. One that we noted that we are averaging just over 3 hours of no officer available time per 24 hour period. These were periods of time when all officers were occupied with other activity and were unavailable to respond immediately to another incident. This caused call stacking (stacking calls in order of priority) where callers were advised that we would send an officer when one was available. Additionally, over the years, we have also deleted civilian positions to maintain the sworn level of service as high as possible. As our ability to provide service has decreased we have made changes in the method of doing business to compensate for these shortages in sworn staff. We have implemented the dictation services, designed to provide an officer with more time on the street as opposed to down time writing reports. We have also had to reduce the hours wherein we would respond to lobby walk in type services (ie; fingerprinting, sex and drug registrations, vehicle releases etc). The police department have also restructured in an attempt to eliminate mid -management levels, while maintaining street level and first line supervision. There are three scenarios which we can foresee in which to deal with the police department, a) maintain our current number of personnel, b) maintain our current ratio of officers per thousand population (1.0), c) or reach a ratio of officers to population which is reasonable such as 1.3 per thousand. A discussion of these follow. MAINTAIN CURRENT STAFFING LEVEL If we chose to maintain the police department at 25 officers and 10 civilians, there are a number of things which will occur and there are known actions which we must take to deal with them. One problem we are presently experiencing at this staffing level is that we have time spans in each day (average of 3.75 hours per day) where we have no officers immediately available to respond to calls. (Our survey was conducted for a three week period of time and ranged from a low of 1 hour 24 minutes to a high of 8 hours and 26 minutes per 24 hour period.) We know, of course, that the population will continue to increase (minus a no -growth initiative by the Council), and thus the number of incidents we handle will increase. To deal with the increases in calls and population, we will have to make a number of significant decreases in service. These cutbacks of service could include such things as us no longer responding to traffic collisions, crime reports by appointment, and may reach a level of only responding to serious crimes in progress. A danger of electing to go this route or the one listed below is the employee burnout and injury rate which could be anticipated to increase with an insufficient staffing level. Page 8 1 1 • • MAINTAIN CURRENT RATIO OF OFFICERS PER POPULATION Based on the present staffing level of 25 officers, our current ratio is 1.0 officer per 1,000 population. Assuming that the decision was made to remain at this level of staffing as our population grows, our staffing level would equivalently grow. However, even at this level, we may still have to implement some of the above mentioned reductions in service, and are currently exploring these in anticipation of possible reductions in funding sources. Should funding not be available to maintain the police department staffing level, cuts in areas such as animal control, and D.A.R.E. should be first considered. Any cutback in services would of course be stretched out over a greater time span and the reductions would, hopefully, not be as drastic as in the maintenance of staffing level scenario. If the percentage of the police department budget was reduced to approximately 63% of the general fund budget, we would need additional revenue in excess of $300,000 per year, to maintain our current ratio of 1.0 officers per 1,000 population. ESTABLISH A BETTER RATIO OF OFFICERS PER POPULATION Current FBI statistics indicate that cities of our size in the Southwestern United States have a ratio of 1.5 officers per 1,000 population. As a city grows this ratio decreases and stabilizes at about 1.3 officers per 1,000 population. Should we elect to achieve and maintain this level of service to the community, we should be able to reasonably deal with crime problems and to provide the community with adequate police services. It is recommended that we attain a staffing level of 1.3 officers per 1,000 population. This is determined by taking into account the current size of the city (land area and population), the number of incidents handled (1994 = 26,000+), and the nature of the criminal activity encountered. This staffing level would enable the city to incorporate a plan to transition to Community Oriented Policing/Government over the next two years and expect to be reasonably successful. Should we elect to attain this level of staffing, we would need close to $800,000 per year in additional funding. POLICE FACILITY The present police facility is approximately 6,500 sq. ft. The Ralph Anderson & Assoc. police service impact model, authorized by the City Council, recommends that a police facility have 550 sq. ft. per patrol officer. Based upon that assumption, we should have a facility of approximately 9,900 sq. ft. Almost half of the present facility consists of mobile offices which are on a lease basis ($20,000. per yr) and we will never own them. (This agreement was entered into during prior city management when a permanent facility was projected.) To reach the recommendations in the impact model, we would need to replace Page 9 the mobile offices, (3120 sq. ft.) with permanent buildings and add an additional 3,400 sq. ft. The cost to build this 6,500 sq. ft. @ $50. per sq. ft. would be about $325,000 if we had the space to add on. This would be to just meet our current needs. A facility to house the police department and to fulfill the needs of the community for the next 20 years is projected to cost between $9 and $12 million. The cost varies depending on the staffing direction the Council elects to take, regardless of which, we have outgrown our current facility, and have limited room for expansion on the present site. To service the sort of debt which would finance a facility of this type would cost almost $1.5 million per year for 20 years. FIRE DISCUSSION Staffing During the last five years, the Fire Department has experienced some growth in staffing and then a recent decline, due to the elimination of the Apprentice Program. The staffing level peaked in 1993 and 1994 with a three man engine company and a two man squad in service at the same time. Listed below is a chart to reflect these figures: YEAR TOTAL PERSONNEL TOTAL SHIFT MANNING NUMBER OF CALLS POPULATION 1990 9 3 2176 15654 1991 9 3 2456 17960 1992 12 3 TO 5 2590 20735 1993 15 5 2645 22225 1994 15 4 TO 3 2494 23976 1995 9 3 2654(Estimated) 24186(Estmated) In 1994, the Fire Department experienced a reduction in calls from the previous year. There were 6.83 calls per day in 1994. Since January we are averaging 7.27 calls per day, which, if continued, would total approximately 2654 calls in 1995. The decrease in 1994 could have been caused by a reduction in our winter population, but we do not have the information available to verify that. The Hemet Fire Department experienced a similar decrease in the number of calls they responded to last year. 1 1 The major impact on the service level of the Fire Department, has been the reduction in the number of units responding to calls. When the Department had two units in service to respond on calls, even though they were both stationed at the same location, there was always a second unit available, every time one of the units was committed to a call. With one unit available for calls, as we are staffed today, each time the unit is Page 10 1 • • committed on a call, the next available unit is dispatched on a mutual aid basis from an adjoining agency. The net effect is an increase in our average response time to emergency calls. The manning reduction also reduces our effectiveness at larger emergencies that require more manpower, until the arrival of mutual aid units. Some other impacts on the service level that the reduction of manpower has created are: ► The ability to conduct necessary training, while still remaining in service for emergency calls. ► The ability to provide comprehensive engine company inspections. ► Our availability for public education programs. ► The completion of routine maintenance on equipment. The direct impact on these functions is difficult to quantify, but have an impact none the Tess. In an attempt to offset some of the impacts of declining manpower that affect our service level, the Fire Department has participated in training programs developed by the Hemet Fire Department. In order to accomplish this, Hemet has sent an unit to cover our response area while we are training. We also recently eliminated some of the Public Service type calls we had been responding to, which leaves our single engine available more of the time for emergency calls. In order to establish a reasonable staffing pattern, I conducted a survey of some other cities in Riverside County to compare manning levels and station numbers. The results are listed below. San Jacinto Banning Norco Murrieta Indio Cathedral City s Population 24,000 23,000 25,000 32,000 42,000 35,000 Square Miles 25 22 15 26 21 29 Number of Stations 1 2 2 3 3 3 Annual Calls 2,500 2,800 1,600 1,600 3,000 3,000 Total Personnel 11 24 26 25 35 34 Page 11 San Jacinto Banning Norco Murrieta Indio Cathedral City Manning per Shift 3 5 8 7 8 10 Total Units Responding 1 2 3 3 4 5 Firefighters Per 1,000 Population .46 1.09 1.04 .78 .83 .97 Total Budget $904,983 $1,700,000 $1,850,000 $2,600,000 $3,173,000 $3,125,918 It is apparent by comparing the statistics from other cities, that San Jacinto is providing Fire Services at a much lower level of manpower and funding than other cities in Riverside County. In studying the cost of opening a second Fire Station in two years, and increasing the manning to six personnel per shift over the next ten years, I have estimated there will be a shortfall of almost seven million dollars over that ten year period (see matrix below). If the second Fire Station were opened, and each shift was staffed by six personnel, the number of Firefighters per 1,000 population would become .67 at today's population figure. If the population increases by 10,000 people over the next ten years to 34,000, the ratio of Firefighters per 1,000 would be .56 which is still well below the average of those cities used for comparison. Year Suppression Manning Shift Manning Additional Cost Revenue Required General Fund' Shortfall 1995/96 12 4 $325,934 $1,066,864 $714,694 ($352,170) 1996/97 15 5 $391,297 $1,458,161 $743,282 ($714,879) 1997/98 15 5 $1,458,161 $773,013 ($685,148) 1998/99 15 5 $1,458,161 $803,934 ($654,227) 1999/2000 18 6 $217,080 $1,675,241 $836,091 ($839,150) 2000/2001 18 6 $1,675,241 $869,535 ($805,706) 2001/2002 18 6 $1,675,241 $904,316 ($770,925) 2002/2003 18 6 $1,675,241 $940,489 ($734,752) 2003/2004 18 6 $1,675,241 $978,108 ($697,133) 2004/2005 18 6 $1,675,241 $1,017,232 ($658,009) 10 Year Shortfall ($6,912,100) Page 12 1 • • Assumes 4% Increase per Year from 94-95 levels. ► In 1996/97, a Fire Station would be added. The additional cost of the operation of the Fire Station is included. A Fire Mitigation Fee is collected on all new commercial and residential construction to fund future Fire facilities. There would not be enough in the fund by 1996/97 to build a new station and buy a new engine, estimated to cost approximately one million dollars, so some type of financing would be required. Future mitigation fees collected could repay the debt. It is apparent that to increase the Fire Department resources to an acceptable level will require some additional type of funding to augment our portion of the general fund revenues. CONCLUSION In summary, the General Fund revenues available to the City Council are not keeping up with necessary service levels and demands. Due to the continued recession in this area, as well as federal and state revenue reductions/mandates to local government, this gap between revenues and service levels also looks like it is going to continue or even increase. In trying to close this gap, the City Council and staff need to continue to find ways to be efficient and as cost effective as possible. We need to continue to evaluate our services and how most efficiently we can perform them, whether that be by contract, consolidation or City provided. However, even with this, the gap between service levels and revenues is too great to be made up only by efficient service delivery. Especially if the Council wants to increase police, fire or public works service levels, the Council may wish to consider the development of other revenue sources. In researching the options you might have available, there appear to be two: • The first would be the implementation of a Utility User's tax. This is a charge on one or more utilities to raise revenue for general government purposes. The rate can be a flat rate or a percentage of the bill. Because this is revenue for general government, the Council can only commit the revenue raised to a specific function on an annual basis. This means that if the Council enacted a Utility User's tax because it wanted to have more police officers or public works personnel, it can make that pledge, but only annually, through its budget, could allocate the funds as they saw fit. To enact this tax, a simple majority vote of the City Council is necessary. A vote of the people is not required. • The second action and the only other one of which staff is aware of, would allow dedication of funds for a specific purpose. This alternative places a special assessment on parcels after a two-third's affirmative vote of the electorate. The Page 13 rate for this method is determined by the Council and is put on the ballot for a vote. NEXT STEPS The City Council needs to provide staff direction on, if and how, you would like to proceed with this issue. If the Council is interested in exploring one or both of the previously discussed revenue options, Council should give direction to the staff on the timeline in which they would like to see this discussed, what outreach should be done, and the service levels that you would like to see established or improved. The Council may wish to appoint a Council ad hoc committee to work with the staff to work on this issue and make recommendations to the full Council. Page 14 I 4 1 A ::4D 8. Memorandum SA N JJACU'JTO TO: Fellow Councilmembers FROM: Mayor David B. Solorio DATE: April 27, 1995 RE: OUTSIDE AGENCYIADHOC COMMITTEE APPOINTMENTS Recommendation: Confirm the attached list of Council appointments to other agency committees. Background: The Council's adopted policies and procedures on appointments to other agency committees state that "the Mayor shall select representatives, with confirmation by the full Council, to other agency committees, who shall serve for a term of one year. The Mayor shall review these appointments annually, upon any vacancy, or as deemed necessary, for the continuing necessity." (Resolution 2194 , Section 11.1.1). With the resignation of Henry Hafliger, there is a need to revise several of the appointments. Also, there have been several committees that are no longer in existence, that can be eliminated - the EMWD Service Area Study Committee (the EMWD Planning Task Force has taken its place); Gang Task Force (which has merged with Valley Youth Task Force); and March Air Force Base Community Council. The attached list is my selection of representatives that I would recommend that you confirm. At our April 18th meeting, the Council also asked me to appoint two adhoc committees - one to review various franchise issues and a second one to meet with the Soboba Band of Indians to discuss the bridge and other matters. I have selected Jim Oaks and myself to serve on the Franchise Adhoc Committee. Before selecting representatives to the Soboba Adhoc Committee, I want to send a letter expressing our interest in meeting with them and ask them to respond as to their interest. I will advise you on their response. In keeping with our policies and procedures (Resolution 2194), these adhoc committee selections are appointed by the Mayor. No confirmation by the City Council is required. CITY OF SAN JACINTO REPRESENTATIVES TO OUTSIDE BOARDS/AGENCIES/COMMITTEES Child Care Consortium - meets monthly and periodic, as necessary (Council Representative - Leahy) (EMWD Planning Task Force - next meeting is Thursday, June 8) (Council Representative - Oaks) Groundwater Association - meets monthly (3rd Monday) - 1:30 - EMWD (Council Representative - Oaks) RTA (Riverside Transit Authority) - meets monthly (4th Thursday) - 3:00 - Riverside (Council Representative - Oaks, Alternate - Solorio) Valley Youth Task Force - meets monthly (2nd Thursday) - Valley Wide (Council Representative - Leahy) WRCOG Executive Committee - meets monthly (1st Monday) 4:00 - Moreno Valley (Council Representative - Solorio, Alternate - Williams) Ramona Pageant Advisory Committee - meets on an as needed basis, periodically (Council Representative - Oaks) City -to -City Recycling Standing Committee - meets on as needed basis (Council Representatives - Solorio and Williams) Riverside County City Selection Committee - meets on an as -needed basis (Council Representative - Solorio) Senior Housing Ad Hoc Citizens' Committee - meets on an as -needed basis (Council Representatives - Leahy and Oaks) May 2, 1995 111111r- IS A N JACI NTO A.;.DA8•3.3 Memorandum TO: Mayor and Cour ffnembers FROM: Pa faster DATE: April 27, 1995 RE: MAY 23RD STUDY SESSION At this point, there are no specific agenda items scheduled for your May 23rd Study Session. In view of that, I wanted to ask the Council if you have any agenda items you would like to schedule for that meeting. One potential item would be to review follow up from the Council's goals and objectives workshop. Another option would be to cancel the meeting. 14111111 S A N !JACINTO LdYS8.4 Memorandum TO: Honorable Mayor and,Councilmembers FROM: Pariie. ae ster DATE: April 27, 1995 RE: PROPOSED JOINT MEETING WITH THE SAN JACINTO CHAMBER OF COMMERCE The Chamber has sent the attached letter to the Council requesting an opportunity to hold a joint study session with the San Jacinto Council and staff. Although the letter states a preference for July, Executive Director Patti Drusky indicates now that June would be preferable. Your June 27 study session is relatively open at this point, if you would like to schedule it then. If the Council is interested in meeting with the Chamber Board, it would be helpful to have you give us discussion topics that you would like included in the joint meeting. Patti Drusky will be doing the same with her Board of Directors. San '4, Jacinto Chamber of Commerce & Visitor/Information Center April 19, 1995 Mayor David Solorio City of San Jacinto 312 E. Main Street San Jacinto, CA 92583 Dear Mayor Solorio; The San Jacinto Chamber of Commerce Board of Directors is requesting an opportunity to hold Joint Study Sessions between the Chamber board members, the City of San Jacinto Council members, and San Jacinto City Manager and Department Heads. Please contact my office regarding a date and time in July that is convenient for you and the Council. Thank you for your consideration. Sincerely, CC - Patti K. Drusky Executive Director cc: Pamela Easter / Jan Leahy James Oaks Patrick Williams 188 East Main Street San Jacinto, California 92583 909/654-9246 FAX 909/654-5007