Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAbout08/29/03 B A K E R S F I E L D CITY MANAGER'S OFFICE MEMORANDUM August 29, 2003 TO: Honorable Mayor and City Council FROM: Alan Tandy, City Manager SUBJECT: General Information 1. The Police Department has been advised that we have been awarded a $1.0 million grant to hire eight sworn police positions to serve as school resource officers. It is through the Department of Justice. Congratulations to the Police Department and, particularly, the staff who were involved with the successful grant process! 2. A memo is enclosed regarding the County staff's position on the Ad Hoc Ambulance System Committee and the changes to the County Ambulance system that were adopted by the Board of Supervisors. A lot of effort went into the ambulance rate issue over the past few months. Had the County shared with us their intent to take away City rate control with an urgency ordinance, we might have saved a lot of time and energy! The City Attorney is now reviewing our ambulance ordinance. A large portion of what we have on the books is now irrelevant and will be scheduled for deletion, probably at the September 24th meeting. It is confusing for the public to have it on the books when it is no longer in effect. 3. We are doing a three month extension of our interim agreement with the County on animal control. While we are working diligently on a longer term deal, the first three months have flown by. We appreciate their cooperation! 4. In light of the adoption of a State budget, we have unfrozen flex position promotions, are scheduling a Police academy in January, and are authorizing the filling of some of the budgeted, but to this point frozen, vacancies in General Fund positions. We are not going to unfreeze all of them; however, as we know, litigation and the Legislature are just around the corner to renew financial threats to us! 5. When we presented the budget to you, we made it clear that we did not have the resources to absorb, as we have in recent years, the expected increases in insurance costs. We budgeted half of the expected increases, which left the alternate of increasing employee contributions or decreasing benefits to deal with Honorable Mayor and City Council August 29, 2003 Page 2 the other half of the costs. Staff members met with the Insurance Committee this week, which consists, primarily, of representatives of the collective bargaining group. Their recommendation leaves us $400,000 short, on an annual basis, of where we need to be. It will now go to the Personnel Committee, and then to the City Council. Should the costs not be dealt with in the insurance area, we will be forced to go back to additional staffing cuts. All of these budget control measures are difficult, and we all wish circumstances were different! 6. A report from Public Works staff on the Westside Parkway open house meeting that was held Thursday evening is enclosed. The next meeting is tentatively being planned for December. 7. NOR has informed us that there have been two recent vacancies on their Board of Directors. Due to those circumstances, NOR has requested State legislation to change the number of their board members from seven to five. The reduction in members would make the NOR Board consistent with other districts and the general state law pertaining to recreation district boards. The City would retain two appointed positions, and the County would retain three. The proposed legislation is attached for your review. 8. Through the help of parents' groups and some staff support, the Mesa Marin ball fields have undergone some significant rehabilitation and improvements. We continue to encourage other teams and leagues to involve themselves in the same way! 9. With regard to the department head vacancy in Recreation and Parks, Alan Christensen is helping to bring several tasks to conclusion and is helping to evaluate the overall circumstances to give guidance and background upon which an eventual decision will be reached. Given the financial circumstances, taking some time to evaluate seems prudent. Please call if you have questions. 10. Public Works staff is in on-going discussions with CalTrans regarding our request to close the "tree" streets along 24th Street. A progress report is enclosed for your information. 11. EDCD will be holding two public meetings next month to receive input in developing the FY 2004/05 Action Plan for CDBG, HOME, and ESG funding. The September 16th meeting will be at the MLK Center, and the September 23rd meeting will be at the Boys and Girls Club. A flyer is attached for your information. 12. A memo from EDCD reporting that Victory Circle is in compliance with the terms of their loan with the City is enclosed. 13. Responses to Council requests are enclosed, as follows: Councilmember Carson · Status report on installation of curb and gutter in area of 1100 Belle Terrace; Honorable Mayor and City Council August 29, 2003 Page 3 Councilmember Hanson Analysis of purchasing versus leasing equipment (responses from Information Technology and Public Works); Councilmember Salvaggio · Status report regarding the clean up efforts and fencing of the vacant lot on Hughes Lane. AT:rs cc: Department Heads Pam McCarthy, City CLerk Trudy Slater, Administrative Analyst B A K E R S F I E L D OFFICE OF THE CITY MANAGER MEMORANDUM August 27, 2003 TO: Alan Tandy, City Manager FROM: John W. Stinsor~,~s~sistant City Manager SUBJECT: Ad Hoc Ambulance System Committee Yesterday afternoon I spoke with Adele Klein who said it was the County's preference that the Ad Hoc Ambulance System Committee item not be placed on the Joint Agenda for the September 15th meeting. She said they thought more work needed to be done at the staff level determining the role and objectives of the committee before putting it before the bodies for action. Her comments were consistent with previous comments from Scott Jones which indicated they needed to include other cities in the process since they would also be affected by system changes and a structure and process to accomplish that needed to be studied. Additionally, at yesterday's Board of Supervisor's meeting the Board took several actions which will impact the provision of ambulance services county-wide. They approved the creation of exclusive operating areas within the county and authorized the EMS department to implement them; authorized the EMS department to negotiate interim performance contracts with existing ambulance providers for Board approval; authorized the EMS department to develop a Request for Proposal process for exclusive operating areas in accordance with State Emergency Medical Services Authority guidelines (this appears to provide for grandfathering of existing providers based on a case by case basis and upon meeting a qualifying criteria); and voted to increase ambulance rates in the Metropolitan Bakersfield area (within the 2010 plan boundary) to the rates the City Council had approved on Exhibit "B" of the July 30, 2003 resolution setting ambulance rates in the City. They also authorized the EMS department to negotiate an agreement with the Polaris Group for consulting services related to the implementation of exclusive operating areas, negotiating interim performance contracts with providers and developing the RFP process. I have attached a copy of the letter from the EMS department to the Board of Supervisors which outlines their recommendations for your information. County staff has indicated that the Board in regulating rates throughout the metro area has pre-empted the city's rate setting authority. County staff was also directed to come back in two weeks to make recommendations to the Board regarding applying the metro ambulance rates to other areas served by Hall Ambulance, and S:~JOHN\Projects~,MB~Ad Hoc Ambulance System Committee.doc to evaluate further increases to the mileage charge and inclusion of a waiting charge in the rate structure for the metro area. Due to the significant changes to the ambulance regulatory environment made by the County and the County's approach to reviewing the EMS system, the Council may want to reconsider the original concept of an ad hoc committee. County staff has indicated a willingness to work with the City regarding technical issues and to get City input on proposed system changes. They are working with their ambulance consultant to develop a process to accomplish this. S:~JOHN\Projects~AMB~Ad Hoc Ambulance System Committee.doc David Baumstm'k ~~ 1400 ~ec~or ~ Baker~eld. CA 93301 Robert Baru~ M.D. F~x (661) $22-8453 Medical ~ ~ ~ (8~) ~2~ DEP~~NT OF E~RGEN~ ~DIC~ S~~S · Au~ 26, K~ Co~ A~ve Cmt~ 1115 T~ P~A~ON OF EMS SYS~M ~V~W PR~ ~E ON~ ~CO~ED A~ONS FOR S~EQ~T ~W ~ MOD~CA~ON, O~~ ~SIONS, ~ ~ ~G~ON ~ ~ ~~ o~ ~e ~S S~ ~ ~ ~ ~om ~d ~ of a ~C, ~ ~ ~oI~ ~ ~~ ~ Po~s p~ ~ ~ ~) of ~ ~'s ~S S~ ~ ~ ~ of ~t~ve ~~ ~ ~t ~ ~ t~ · e ~on o~ ~e ~ ~S S~ R~ ~ (~c~t A). ~ Ob~ti~ of ~ ~S S~m ~ ~ - ~ ~e~ ~e ~ °~om ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ fo~ows: ~ w~ f~m~ S~te ~ ~ ~ ~ty for ~ C~ Board of Super~sors August 26, 2003 EMS System Review Process Page 2 3. EOAs can be cstabtished by a competitive bid process or through grandfathering eligible existing providers, as approved by the State EMS Autho~ (Inercinafter"State EMSA"); and 4. The Depamncnt is in the ~oc~ss of ob~,~n$ ~n oplaion fi~m the State EMSA as to Iiem County's dig~'oilit7 to Sraudfathe~. EMS System Review and Modification Process-'Phase Two" It is the Department's intent to recommend to your Board in the coming weeks that a sole source Professional Setwices Agreement be exccuted with The Pola,~ Group authorizing assistance with "Pb. ase Two" of the EMS System review and modification process. A r~lined scope of'work is cturcntly being discussed. Phase II will consist of a detailed s~tem snail,is, input process, and development of'an EOA Plan for submission to the Stat~ The components of iiis phase will include, but not be limited to: 1. Assistance in negotiating interim contracts with the cun~nt providers. 2. Development of rationale, process, and procedures for rate regulation. 3. More in-depth st,k,,~oldor interviews to identify isat~ that should be addressed in the system dc~ign, interactive sessions with your Boant to de,ne and evaluate options in EMS system design, and presentation of EMS s)'stem design specifications that me~t ~ttr Board's requirements. 4. Dcvelopm~I of a proc~s designed to evaluate grandfa~g reclvests submitted by the incumbent providers. Preparation of the EOA Plan for submi.~on to the State EMSA for approval. $. Development of a Request for Proposal (hereinaRer "RFY') that is consistmt with the approved EOA Plan and the EMS design specifications. The dcvelopment process will ~ opportunities for public comment. The RFP will include a scoring methodology and process schedule. 6. Dcvelopment of ncc_,~__~_~/ Count,/ Orai,~,~--e Code an~-~,~ents, peri'onmnce ~ and other docum~ts as n_ _,.,~ea__ _ to prepare t'~r implementation in Phase Three. ~Ie Source Justification As mentioned above, The Polmis Group's involvement in Phase One of the EMS System review process was managed through the execution of a Personal/Professional Services Agn~ement ('ngreinaftcr'PPSA") in April 2003. Sole source justification was provided to and approved by thc Pttrchasins Asent at that timc. The Purchasing Agent luts been authorized bi, your Board to execute PPSA agreements on behalf of thc County. Bosrd of Super~i~or~ Au~t 26,'2~0~ ~MS System l~view Process Page 3 The Polaris Group was selected after the Dcparun~ conducted extensive research of consultant groul~ throughout the nation with expertise in BIviS sys~n and economics aual~is applicable to the simaion in Kern Count. References f,~ other counties and public agencies relive to The Polaris Group were excellent Thc Polaris Croup specializes in work for local governments and dues not contr~ with privatc HMS providers. This has been of critical importance, because Phase One involved evaluation of each ambulance provider's financial ~t~ a~d required an agr~:meat to co~dcngality. As the Depamnent considers the process for subseque~ phases of the EMS Sy~m review .aad modification process, it bas become clear that assistance ~ an oulside expert consultant is well wor, h ~he expense involved. The Depenment reco~ i?~s thc invesunant of time and effort an the pens of The Polaris Group, Depamnc~ staff, and EMS Sysunn stakeholders to conmuct a valuable base of knowledge and rapport among the parties. Project continuity will bc better m,~int~ined by cxtanding the conUactml r¢latio~-~hlp with Thc Polaris Group. Additionally, several other consultant options are no longer viable for thc County's purposes, due to the formation of agreements between them and local emb~l~a~ce providers. For these reasons, the Dcpemncnt is recommending that your Board authorize the Deperun~ to negotiate a sole source agreement with The Polaris Group for ~_~-i_'~m~.e with Phase Two of thc System review and modification process. The Purchasing Agent has reviewed and concurs with the Deparunent's sole source justification. A proposed agreement will be returned to your Board for approval in the coming wecks. Ado~tlon of Urgency Oral--ncc Ano~rllna Chapter 8.12 of the Ordinance Code At~ached for your Board's consideration and approval is a propOSed orah~,~ce to amend several sections of thc currc~ ordinance provisions governing ambulance pcnults and rates contained in Chapter 8.12 (Attachment B). These amendments ere necessa~ to implement the proposal to orate exclusive operating areas, authorize estab!i,hment of ambulauce rates in thc Greater Bakcrsfield mctropolimn area, and extend tho currmt moratorium on new permits and new rates until your Boerd bas approved thc proposed system of EOAs and entcrod into agrcenmns with amb,~,!,mee operator. Under these p~posed oralnence amendments, the DePertmcnt will be authorized to enter into intaim contracts with existing ambulance providers to ~int~in current lcvels of service. The Depamnent is requesting that your Board enact this ordinance as an urgency measure due to the potential impacts on public health, safety and welfare should ambulance providers raise rates to cos~-prohlbitive levels and to p, mb~l~mce Rates - Couutvwide A moratorium on ambulance rate changes was recently implemented though the County's ordinance (Chapter 8.12) and currently extends until October 1, 2003. Proposed Ordimmco Code revisions extend the moratorium on ambulance rate changes until an interim contract is placed into cfl'ect or thc moratorium is repealed or amended. Ambulance rate change rcque~ received prior to ~ly 1,200~ will be managed in accordance with revised Ordinance Code Subsection 8.12.050.C. Board of Supervisor~ August 26, 2003 EMS System Review Process Page 4 Ambulance Rates - Greater Bakersfield Followin~ the __r_r_r_r_r_r_r_r_r~__,v.h pedormed by an outside consultant group (Health Analytics) on the City of Bakersfield's behalf, the City of Bakersfield approved an increase in ambulance rates in the incorpo~t_,,,4 areas of Greater Bakersfield effaciive July 31, 2003. This schedule ofrates is rept, mented in At~aelnnent C. Addit/onaily, thc City .passed a resolution to automatically adopt slightly increased rates (r~,presented in Auachment D), if the County mkm action to adopt rates at that level In an effort to rnainlain ambulance rate amount pagty within the C-reater Bakerstield area and to reapmai to the pending rate incresse request from Hall Ambulance Service, the Department is recommend~ that your Board adopt, effective .august 2/, 2003, the rates represented in Avachnamt D within Creater Bakersfield, as defined in the Metropolitan Bakersfield 2010 General Plan (adol~d October 2002). · Hall Ambulance Service personnel have been in communication with fha Department and Cit~ of Bakersfield staff and Councilmembers about a r~quest to modif~ the rates r~presented in A~_nelm~ent D lo include an amount for "Waiting Thne/l$ minutes+" which is currently allowable under the County's rate schedule, and to ~ the rate for mileage. Depending on tha outcome of the City's review, the schedule accordingly to maintain parity of rates within Greater Bak~sfield. For information, the Cotmty's c'm'r~nt rate schedule relative to the unincorporated a~as within Gt'eater Bak~field is represented in Attachraent E. Resolution - Greater Bakersfield Rate Remdation Although tbe County has not chosen to do so up to this point, $¢~-tion $.12.130 of the Ordinance Code allows the County to ermct amlmlance service rate regulation and ~ablish ra~s by separate regolmion. As described above, due to recent actions by the City of Bakersfield relat~ to rate i~s:ressm, a recommendation and accompanying resolution is being submitted to your Board to establish rate categories and amounts for the Cu~ater Bakersfield a~a (~ F). For purposes of the iax~x~d rate categories and amounts, 'Greater Bakersfield" is .defined in tbe Metropolitan Bakersfield 2010 General Plan (adopted October 2002). The recommended effective date of the rate changes is August 27, 2003. The actions before your Board are intended lo enhance EMS $1~m stability and prepa~ for subsequent modifications. The Department has wcaked closely with lhe County Adminislrative Office and County Counsel, and both a~ ~n concurrence with the r~.onmamdationa below. In essence, what these recomm,.~,b,gions achieve is as follows: (1) Stabilize the integri~t of the EMS system. (2) Provide for immediate and longer lerm ordlru~..e changes. Board of Supervbors August 26, 2003 EMS S~t~m R~view Provide for State action federal anti-truzt ~ty once F. OAs arc in place. Enact Countywide anfoulance r~te regulsti~- (5) Establish p~rity of 6rearer Bakersfield ambulance servic~ ram. Therefore, IT IS RECOIvfivlENDED that you~ Boa-d: (I) Hear lxczcnt~on; (2) Approve creation of F. xclusiv¢ Opcradn$ A~as for ~ulancc service within Kcm Counv/and authorize Departme~ to pursue implementation; Authorize the Department to ne~otiatc in~Lm pcrform~n,~e con,'acts with cxistlng ambulance pro,Aden withiu Kern County for Bozrd spproval; (4) Authorize ~h¢ Dq~tn~cnt to develop a Request for PTopc~l proc~s for Exclusive Operating Areas for Board approval, in accordance with State ~ .Medical Services Authority guidelines; (5) Waive reading, e~act ordinance amcndin$ Sections $.12.040, 8.12.0~0, $.12.130, s~l 8.12.260 Adopt resolution cs~bl~hin$ rate categories and zmounts fc~ the Go~__t_~_ Bakersfield area, as dcfmcd in the Metropolitan Bakersfield 2010 General Plan (adogted October 2002); (7) Authorize the Department to negotiate a sole source Professional Services Agreement for approval with PubUc Safety A.~zociatcz, LLC, dba The ?ohuis C, ro~ for consulting services including, but not limited to, assisunce with implemc~on of Bxclush~ ~ Areas, negotiation of inm~m pcrfor~cc contracts with cxisting ~laucc providers, development of a Request for Proposal process; and ($) Receb~e a~i file auached I~lS System Review rcpo~ cc: County Admires' trative Office County Counsel David A. Shrader, President, Thc Polaris Group Emergency Medical Carc Advisory Board (EMCAB) Memben bakersfieldcom 1 http://www.bakersfield.com/top/story/3773985p-3800340c.html County to revamp ambulance system Board of Supervisors also votes to grant a rate jump to Itall Ambulance By DAVIN McHENRY, Californian staff writer e-mail: dmchenry~bakersfield.com Tuesday August 26, 2003, 10:54:06 PM County supervisors agreed to completely overhaul the local ambulance system Tuesday, setting in motion a process that could take two years. In the end, the county is expected to have more control over ambulance providers, who heretofore were allowed to set their own rates and were rarely replaced. At the same time Tuesday, the board also approved a rate increase for metropolitian Bakersfield's lone ambulance service, Hall Ambulance. It was the second rate jump in Bakersfield in less than a month. That means since July 30, rates for ambulance services have climbed 17.1 percent in the city of Bakersfield. Still, Hall Ambulance officials say it isn't enough and supervisors have agreed to consider another increase in two weeks that could push it as high as 31.3 percent. Overhauling the entire ambulance system will take much longer. County officials estimated that it could take up to two years to switch from the current permit-based system. As it stands now, the county gives ambulance companies special permits to serve portions of the county. The five- year permits generally are renewed each year. And since only one permit is usually issued in each area, there is almost no competition. The new system would still allow the county to have just one ambulance company in each area, but it would require a certain amount of competition. The details of that remain to be hammered out. The new system will also put the fate of rates in county hands -- even the rates for ambulance service in the city of Bakersfield. In the past the county has allowed the city to set rates, even though the state gives county supervisors that power. In county areas, ambulance companies were allowed to set their own rates freely. On Tuesday the board agreed to firmly take control of those rates. While the details of the new system are being worked out, the county will begin making temporary deals with ambulance companies to continue serving their areas. Those new deals could include rate increases, which would have to be approved by the board, said county Emergency Medical Services boss David Baumstark. The county is also expected to re-hire consultant firm The Polaris Group in the next two weeks to help put together the new ambulance system. Supervisors won't likely see a first draft of that plan for another four months, Baumstark said. After that it could take another year before the various ambulance service areas could be sent out to bid, said Polaris boss David Shrader. Some companies might even be allowed to continue serving their areas without a public bid, if they meet state grandfathering requirements. "We don't know yet if anyone meets those requirements," Shrader said. Even though the new system threatens to shake up their business, ambulance companies appeared open to the change Tuesday. Former Supervisor Steve Perez, now a political consultant to several rural ambulance companies, said his clients were concerned about grandfathering themselves and making sure the changes won't cause problems with getting financing from banks. Perez noted that banks might not be willing to loan money to ambulance companies if they don't have long-term commitments from the county. While also concerned about future financing, Hall Ambulance officials were almost completely focused on the rates issue Tuesday. Jacqualine Att, controller for the company, asked the board to hold off on the proposed increase. Instead Att said the company wanted to set the Bakersfield rates higher, at levels they requested in December 2002. "We believe our original request needs to be dealt with," she said. "And as the ordinance stood then." In December, Hall Ambulance notified the county it intended to raise rates significantly in unincorporated Bakersfield. The company also asked the Bakersfield City Council to raise rates within city limits ranging from 25 to 77 percent for various services. The new rates would have been the same within and without city limits, something both governments were keen on. But city leaders balked at Hall's proposed increase and called for an analysis of the rates by a consultant. Hall then put its county rate increase on hold, at the county's request, Att said. Eventually the consultant's analysis came back and recommended rates be boosted by 31.3 percent. But instead of raising rates to that level, the council voted on July 30 to match the county rates, an increase of 12.7 percent. The council also agreed that city rates could automatically be increased in the future to match the county's -- to a maximum of 17.1 percent. On Tuesday, supervisors pushed both the city and county rates to that limit. Hall's request to push that even higher is expected to return to the board in two weeks. Att said Hall's first request is not out of line with other ambulance providers in Kern County. Even though the supervisors have taken control of rates countywide, Hall has also asked the city to reconsider its July 30 decision to set rates below the level recommended by the consultant. Copyright © 2003, The Bakersfield Califomian I Email the Webmaster Privacy Policy Statement [ Terms of Use bakersfield, corn http://www.bakersfield.corn/local/story/3769191 p-3795550c.html County supervisors approve ambulance rate increase The Bakersfield Californian Tuesday August 26, 2003, 12:53:31 PM County supervisors agreed this morning to increase ambulance rates in Bakersfield, for the second time in the past month. The increases will be as high as 18 percent for some services and will affect everyone in the greater Bakersfield area. City and county areas of Bakersfield technically have separate ambulance rates, but are currently the same. City leaders boosted their ambulance rates to the same level as the county rates in July. The county then agreed today to increase their rates and bring along the city's rates as well. As it stands now, basic life support will cost $466 while advanced life support will cost $679. There are numerous other charges for everything from the use of oxygen to mileage. The new rates will take effect Wednesday. All of Bakersfield is served by Hall Ambulance. Supervisors also agreed to overhaul their ambulance system over the next two years and to take control of rates within the city away from the Bakersfield City Council. Visit bakersfield.eom later tonight or read Wednesday's Bakersfield Californian for more on the rate increase. Copyright © 2003, The Bakersfield Californian I Email the Webmaster '*~'~'~* '~ Privacy Policy Statement I Terms of Use ~ B A K E R S F I E L D CITY OF BAKERSFIELD MEMORANDUM August 29, 2003 TO: Alan Tandy, City Manager FROM: /~_~Raul M. Rojas, Public Works Director SUBJECT: COMMUNITY OPEN HOUSE FOR THE WESTSIDE PARKWAY As reported at the City Council meeting this past Wednesday, an open house was held last night at the Convention Center. This open house was for informing the community of the status of the Westside Parkway project, report on the accomplishments to date, and receive input regarding the project. Approximately 50 members of the community showed up to talk with staff, ask questions, and receive information. Of the ten written comments received at the meeting, all were either favorable or requested additional information. Staff feels this was a very successful meeting and anticipates having another in December when the draft environmental document becomes available for public review. cc: Jacques R. LaRochelle, Assistant Public Works Director S:XT~DL2003 memos\082903at2.mem.doc B A K E R S F I E L D OFFICE OF THE CITY MANAGER MEMORANDUM August 29, 2003 TO: Alan Tandy, City Manager FROM: John W. Stinsor~, ~sistant City Manager SUBJECT: North Bakersfield Recreation and Park District- Legislation to Change the number of Board Members I was contacted by Dave McArthur, General Manager of the North Bakersfield Recreation and Park District who informed me that there were two recent vacancies on their Board of Directors. One was a City appointee and one was a County appointee. Dave indicated that due to these circumstances their Board was considering requesting legislation to remove a special provision of state law which allows their district to have seven members. All other Recreation and Park Districts have five member boards and removal of this special provision for North Bakersfield would make their board a five member board consistent with other districts and the general state law pertaining to recreation district boards. The proposed legislation would result in the elimination of the two vacant positions and the City would retain two positions and the County would retain three positions. The Board of Supervisors and the City Council appoint the district's directors in proportion to the population in the unincorporated and incorporated areas within the district and the change in the number of members would not significantly change the proportional representation. Dave McArthur has indicated that his Board has approved requesting that special legislation be passed to make this change. They have asked Assemblyman Kevin McCarthy to assist them and the required language change has been included as an amendment to Assembly Bill 650 (Plescia) a summary of the bill is attached. Document2 RECEIVED: 8/27/03 11:21AM; ->CITY OF BAKERSFIELD; #409; PAGE 2 ~G.-2q' OS(WED) 10:01 SENATE LOCAL GOVERNMENT COMMITTE TEL:916 522 0298 P. 002/002 Reduce the Size of the Board of Directors North B~kersfield Recreation and Park District Proposed Am~ndm_ents.to Assembly Bill 6S.0_~leseia) Summary: The proposed amendments reduce the size of the North Bakersfield Recreation and Park District's board of directors from seven to five members. Back,round: Except for the North Bakersfield Recreation and Park District, all other recreation and park districts have five-member boards of directors (Public Resources Coclc §5784.1 Iai), .Thc North Bakersfield Recreation and Park District was a"county recreation district" with a seven-member board of directors appointed by the Kern County Board of Supervisors. In 1959, after the Legislature rewrote the statute, the County Counsel said that .the District could keep its seven-member board. In 1988, District officials could find no statutory authority for a seven-member board. Thc Leg- islature then allowed thc District to keep its bigger-board (former Public Resources Code §$781.46; SB 1917, Rogers, 1988). When the Legislature rewrote the Recreation and Park District Law, it retained this anomaly (Public Resources Code §$784.1 [al', SB 70'], Senate Com____mittee on Local Government, 2001). If a recreation-and park district contains both ~__njncorporated and incorporated territory, the county board of supervisors and the city council appoint the district's directors in proportion to the population in the ~.mi_,corporated and incorporated areas (Public Resources Code§$783). The appointing authorities fill any vacancies (Public Resources Code §5784.3 Icl), The Kern County Board of Supervisors appoints four of the District's directors and thc Bakersfield City Council appoints three directors. Situation: The District's boardhas two vacant seats, a County appointee and a City appointee, The District's board believes.that these vacancies represent an opportunity to reduce the size of the board of directors from seven members to five members. County and City officials have agreed to hold off appointing replacements until the District receives legislative approval for a standard-sized board (David McArthur, District general manager, 661/392-2000). P_rol~osed Amelldments: The amendments proposed for AB 650 (Plescia) reduce the size of the board of directors of the North Bakersfield Recreation and Park District from seven members to five members. Senate Local Government Committee August 27, 2003- B A K E R S F I E L D CITY OF BAKERSFIELD MEMORANDUM August 29, 2003 TO: Alan Tandy, City Manager FROM: ,~. ~Raul M. Rojas, Public Works Director SUBJECT: "TREE" STREET CLOSURES ALONG 24TM STREET (SR 178) Staff has been having further discussions this past month with Caltrans regarding the above referenced street closures. Caltrans had sent a letter last month recommending against the closures without mitigation work at the Oak Street/24th Street intersection, and requesting the City provide further study to determine this mitigation. Staff has since sent correspondence reemphasizing the fact that this request was for a trial period (6 months). During this time, staff proposed that Caltrans and the City could jointly analyze the impacts the closures have on Caltrans' facilities (including the intersection), and determine what mitigation improvements (if any) would be needed based on actual traffic data (instead of calculated traffic data). Then, at the end of the trial period, the City could decide based upon input from the neighborhood and the mitigation improvements Caltrans would require whether to pursue the permanent closure of these streets or to remove the barricades and reopen the streets. In discussions, Caltrans has provided a favorable tone to this proposal, but staff is still waiting for a written response. If a favorable response is received, Staff will report back to Council with costs, timelines, etc. for the closures. cc: Jacques R. LaRochelle, Assistant Public Works Director S:\TED\2003 memos\082903at.mem.doc ATTENTION · ° S Bakersfield Resident You're Invited to A Public Meeting to Discuss Housing and Community Development Needs in Your Neighborhood Join your neighbors and City representatives at a community meeting to receive general Housing and Community Development program and application information for Fiscal Year 2004 to 2005. We will be discussing three major sources of federal grant money that the City will receive for Fiscal Year 2004-2005 for City programs (over $6.2 million was budgeted for FY 2003-04): eCommunity Development Block Grant (CDBG) e HOME Investment Partnerships (HOME) · Emergency Shelter Grants (ESG) The results of this meeting will be the basis for receiving input on community & housing development issues and developing our fifth Action Plan of the Consolidated Plan 2005 for FY 2004-2005 to address these needs. Meetinq Locations Martin L. King Jr. Center Meeting Room Boys and Girls Club Meeting Room 1000 South Owens Street 801 Niles Street Bakersfield, California or Bakersfield, California September 16, 2003 (Tuesday) September 23, 2003 (Tuesday) 5:30 p.m. 5:30 p.m. For more information, please stop by or call City of Bakersfield, Economic and Community Development Department, 900 Truxtun Avenue, Suite 201, Bakersfield, CA 93301, Phone (661) 326-3765, FAX (661) 328-1548, or TDD (661) 324-3631. The meeting rooms are accessible to the disabled. For special arrangements, please contact this department five (5) working days prior to the meeting you wish to attend. S:~,ction PlansV~ction Plan 2004-05\City Flyer 2004-05.doc LUUO B A K E RS F I E L D .... Economic and Community Development Department MEMORANDUM August 28, 2003 TO: Alan Tandy, City Manager ~&.,//~ FROM: Donna L. Kunz, Economic Development Director SUBJECT: VICTORY CIRCLE EMPLOYMENT STATUS - YEAR 2 Agreement No. #00-207 (executed 8/16/00) between the City of Bakersfield and Victory Circle, provided a $49,906.19 repayable loan for permit fees and equipment to assist the company in their relocation. The loan is to be repaid at zero (0%) interest at the end of five years if all the terms and conditions of the agreement are met. The employment terms required, - the company would create 3 jobs in Year 2 (a total of 21 jobs over five years), of those workers hired, at least 51% must be Iow- and moderate income individuals. The company has submitted their required second year employment report. Victory Circle has met the requirements of the agreement. The company hired six employees during the employment year, with 66% of the hires qualifying as Iow- and moderate income individuals. Therefore, Victory Circle has met the terms and conditions required in the agreement and qualifies does not have to pay off the loan this year. I propose we send a letter like we do with other such loans, which merely reflects the ministerial action of agreement compliance for the second year of the agreement. With approval from you, we will immediately mail the letter. Cc: Victory Circle file P:\ CLIENTS\ Victory Circle \ memo Year 2.dot B A K E R S F I E L CITY OF BAKERSFIELD MEMORANDUM August 28, 2003 TO: ALAN TANDY, CITY MANAGER FROM: RAUL M. ROJAS, PUBLIC WORKS DIRECTOR,~"'~2t~~ SUBJECT: UPDATE ON COUNCIL REFERRAL #557 CURB AND GUTTER AT 1100 BELLE TERRACE Council Referral #557 Councilmember Carson again requested a curb and gutter, be installed at 1100 Belle Terrace. The property at 1100 Belle Terrace has existing curb and gutter. However, there is an area adjacent to 1100 Belle Terrace that does not have curb and gutter. It is a dirt area and the weeds that constantly grow in the gutter do not allow for the nuisance water to flow properly. Due to this problem, Water constantly stands in the gutter in front of 1100 Belle Terrace. Economic & Community Development staff has informed us that they have sufficient funds to pay for the installation of curb and gutter in the problem area adjacent to 1100 Belle Terrace. Street Division staff will schedule the installation of curb and gutter in the problem area and the project will be completed by September 12, 2003. G:\GROUPDAT\Referrals\2003\CC Mtg 07-30\557 - Update.doc B A K E R S F I E L D CITY OF BAKERSFIELD MEMORANDUM August 28, 2003 TO: ALAN TANDY, CITY MANAGER FROM: RAUL M. ROJAS, PUBLIC WORKS DIRECTOR ~ SUBJECT: EQUIPMENT PURCHASE VERSUS LEASE Council Referral #544 Councilmember Hanson requested Public Works Department study the benefits of purchase versus lease include alternative fuel equipment; also Bob Trammel to look at purchase versus lease of technology equipment (i.e., scanners, printers, pc's, etc.). Staff contacted several different companies (Quinn Engine Company, Jim Burke Ford, Central Valley Truck Center, and South Kern Machinery) to obtain lease pricing for several equipment types. Equipment types included a mower, refuse truck, loader, backhoe, sedan, and pickup. No alternative fuel equipment was included in this review since alternative fuel equipment is not available for leasing at this time. Staff's findings are summarized in the attachment. For the 5 equipment types involved in this review, each one showed significant increased costs for leasing versus directly purchasing the equipment. Overall, the attachment shows a $73K (16%) increase in costs with leasing the equipment versus purchasing. In addition to the increased interest costs, some leases have additional constraints such as not to exceed baselines for hours usage or mileage usage. Additional costs would most likely be incurred for exceeding any baselines established by the vendor. Since most lease terms are shorter than the life expectancy used by the City, leasing of the equipment would put it on a shorter replacement cycle, thus incurring further additional costs to the City. Staff recommends continuing the current practice of purchasing equipment outright versus leasing because of the increased costs involved with leasing. G:\GROUPDAT~Referrals~2003\CC Mtg 07-30~544 - Fleet.doc Council Referral #544 Attachment Life Interest Equipment Type Purchase Expectancy Lease Term Paid Mower $ 37,199.98 5years $ 43,351.95' 5years $ 3,454.97 Front Loader Refuse Truck $147,973.00 7 years $166,860.60 5 years $18,887.60 Cat Loader $167,370.00 12 years $198,840.00 5 years $31,470.00 Cat Backhoe $ 68,880.00 12 years $ 81,841.20 5 years $12,961.20 Ford Crown Victoria $ 23,873.85 8 years $ 27,004.19 4 years $ 3,130.34 Ford F-150 Pickup $ 21,782.48 8 years $ 24,638.60 4 years $ 2,856.12 $467,079.31 $542,536.54 $72,760.23 *the unit price of the equipment from this manufacturer for lease is $2,697.00 higher than an outright purchase. G:\GROUPDAT\Referrals~003\CC Mtg 07-30\544 Exhibit A.doc B A K E R S F I E L D iC~)¥1t~qg~G~,~.~..d~.,~. CITY OF BAKERSFIELD MEMORANDUM August 22, 2003 TO: Alan Christensen, Assistant City Manager FROM: Bob Trammell, Director of Information Technology ,~ ~ SUBJECT: Equipment Purchase vs. Lease Currently, the City of Bakersfield purchases computer equipment and then collects depreciation from the departments. These funds are transferred to the equipment replacement fund, which is used to replace the equipment. We are actually acting as our own leasing company. In response to Councilmember Hanson's request, I surveyed several similar sized California cities that currently lease or. have leased their computer hardware including Anaheim, Rohnert Park, Santa Barbara, Fairfield, and Hayward. In almost the cost of lease payments over the term of the lease is more than the initial purchase price. This is because the value of the equipment after the lease terminates is less than the leasing company can recover in disposing of the equipment. Interest rates paid by the various cities varied from 3% to 5.25% depending on the agreement negotiated with the leasing company. The primary advantages mentioned for municipalities of leasing were: Elimination of the need to find capital to purchase a large number of PCs · Guarantee that new equipment would be procured at end of lease since the old equipment must be returned · Elimination of the requirement to do a RFP/bid process · No equipment disposal issues · No requirement to inventory equipment in Fixed Assets for GASB-34 requirements The primary disadvantages mentioned for municipalities of leasing were: · Higher costs over the period of the lease · Equipment must be replaced at end of lease - not. when convenient for City of Bakersfield · City has less negotiation clout with hardware vendors · Less flexibility in configuration of equipment · Less opportunity for local businesses to participate in process B A K E R S F I E L D CITY OF BAKERSFIELD MEMORANDUM August 28, 2003 TO: ALAN TANDY, CITY MANAGER FROM: RAUL M. ROJAS, PUBLIC WORKS DIRECTOR~_...-~_.-L~.~.~ SUBJECT: UPDATE ON COUNCIL REFERRAL #000484 VACANT LOT ON HUGHES LANE Council Referral #000484 ICouncilmember Salvaggio requested Public Works prepare a response to a Code Enforcement memo regarding vacant lot on Hughes Lane, south of railroad tracks near Brookhaven residential area, which is owned by the City and is used for a transfer site for street sweepers. The Union Pacific Railroad Company owns the vacant lot that is used as a transfer site for sweeper dumps. The Street Division has been trying to come to an agreement with the railroad regarding the continual use of the lot and the fencing of the property. However the Railroad Company's property manager keeps stalling and will not give staff an answer as to whether we can come to an agreement regarding the use of the lot. On Tuesday, August 26, 2003, Street Division staff cleaned the part of the property that was used as a transfer site. The site will no longer be used as a transfer site for sweeper dumps. There are some railroad ties, overgrown weeds and other debris on the property that needs to be cleaned by the Union Pacific Railroad Company. Code Enforcement will be made aware of the problem. In addition, a wood,link fence will be installed in front of the property, on the City's right- of-way area facing Hughes Lane. G:\GROUPDAT\Referrals~003\CC Mtg 05-28\484- Update.doc