ABSTRACT: One Noteworthy 1 August 2011 Closed Session Agenda Item, namely Meet and confer with the Carmel-by- the-Sea’s Meyers-Milias Brown Act representative, Interim City Administrator Goss, to give direction regarding labor negotiations with the International Association of Firefighters, Carmel-by-the-Sea Police Officers Association, and LIUNA/UPEC Local 792 and three noteworthy 2 August 2011 Agenda Items, namely Update on provision of fire services, an appeal of the Planning Commission’s decision to approve Design Study, Demolition Permit and Coastal Development Permit applications for the construction of a new residence located on Mission Street 2 NW of 11th Avenue and a Resolution to adopt a Fire Department Emergency Medical Service Fee. Excerpts from Agenda Item Summaries and Staff Reports are presented.
CITY OF CARMEL-BY-THE-SEA
CITY COUNCIL AGENDA PACKET
Regular Meeting
Tuesday, August 2, 2011
4:30 p.m., Open Session
Live & Archived Video Streaming
City Hall
East side of Monte Verde Street between Ocean and Seventh Avenues
V. Announcements from Closed Session, from City Council Members and the City Administrator.
A. Announcements from Closed Session.
Pursuant to Government Code Section 54956 et seq. of the State of California, the City Council will adjourn to Closed Session to consider the following:
1. Labor Negotiations – Gov’t. Code Section 54957.6(a) Meet and confer with the Carmel-by-the-Sea’s Meyers-Milias Brown Act representative, Interim City Administrator Goss, to give direction regarding labor negotiations with the International Association of Firefighters, Carmel-by-the-Sea Police Officers Association, and LIUNA/UPEC Local 792.
C. Announcements from City Administrator.
4. Update on provision of fire services.
VIII. Public Hearings
A. Consideration of an appeal of the Planning Commission’s decision to approve Design Study, Demolition Permit and Coastal Development Permit applications for the construction of a new residence located on Mission Street 2 NW of 11th Avenue. The property owner is Domicile Properties, LLC. The appellant is Sherrie Spendlove Gallo, joined by three other neighbors. (Continued from July.)
Description: The appellants are requesting that the Council overturn the approval of the project. The appellants are generally concerned with the location of the detached garage and the size of the proposed residence.
Staff Recommendation: Deny the appeal and uphold the Planning Commission’s unanimous approval.
Important Considerations: The applicant is unable to develop the middle portion of the lot due to the presence of two significant trees.
Decision Record: On May 11, 2011 the Planning Commission unanimously approved this project.
RECOMMENDATION
Deny the appeal and uphold the Planning Commission’s unanimous approval.
BACKGROUND
The project site is located on Mission Street two northwest of Eleventh Avenue and is developed with a small one-story residence. The property contains three significant trees, one of which is located near the center of the lot. A Determination of Ineligibility for listing on the City’s Inventory of Historic Resources was issued on November 8, 2010.
On May 11, 2011 the Planning Commission unanimously approved the construction of a new one-story residence on the subject property. The Planning Commission was presented with opposition letters from three of the appellants at the hearing. However, the Commission determined that the proposed project met the zoning requirements and was consistent with the Design Guidelines.
PROJECT DESCRIPTION
The proposed residence is 1,583 square feet in size with a 217-square-foot detached garage located in the front setback. The applicant is proposing a combination of board and batten siding with stucco. Unclad wood windows and doors are proposed throughout the residence.
EVALUATION
Basis for Appeal: This approval is being appealed by four neighbors who live within the immediate vicinity of the project. The appeal is led by Sherrie Spendlove Gallo, the neighbor who lives directly to the north of the subject property.
Summary: The proposed residence is one story, presents a simple design and
incorporates the use of wood siding. The applicant has also done a nice job of designing the residence around the three significant trees on the property and redesigned the project early in the planning process to help mitigate the impact on the northern neighbor. For these reasons the Planning Commission determined that the proposed project is consistent with the Guidelines. The Commission considered the concerns that were raised by the neighbors and determined that the project was appropriate. Staff concurs with the Commission.
RECOMMENDATION
Deny the appeal and uphold the Planning Commission’s unanimous approval.
X. Resolutions
B. Consideration of a Resolution to adopt a Fire Department Emergency Medical Service Fee.
Description: This Resolution would establish an Emergency Medical Service Fee to reimburse the City for expenses related to the Fire Department’s response to medical emergencies within the City of Carmel-by-the-Sea.
Staff Recommendation: Adopt the Resolution.
Important Considerations: This fee would allow the City to obtain reimbursement for Fire Department EMS calls from insurance companies, government health programs, and individuals. This fee would help cover the costs of Fire Department EMS calls. At a fee of $250 per call, which is the low end of the range of this fee collected in other California cities, it is estimated that the City would obtain an estimated $42,640 in annual revenue to support Fire Department emergency medical services.
Decision Record: The City Council, during its June 2011 budget workshops, indicated an interest in considering the adoption of this fee.
A potential fee for supporting emergency medical services provided by the Carmel Fire Department was suggested in the budget transmittal letter and was discussed during the budget workshops. The proposed fee is called an Emergency Medical Service (EMS) fee.
PURPOSE
The purpose of an EMS fee is to reimburse the City for the expense of its Fire Department in responding to medical emergencies within the City of Carmel-by-the-City. While general tax dollars are used to support the availability of three fire fighters and an engine 24 hours a day, seven days a week, specific service is provided for short periods of time to those who receive emergency medical service. The proposed fee will cover a portion of this expense.
Part of the rationale for such a fee is that just as general tax dollars should not be required to support ambulance transport services, the response to emergency medical calls by the Fire Department also should not be subsidized by general tax dollars. It should be noted that the City currently is unable to obtain reimbursement for Fire Department EMS calls from insurance companies, government health programs (Medi-Cal), and individuals because there is no fee structure in place. The City can recover the cost of this service by establishing a fee for service and by billing the appropriate agencies.
How Will This Fee Work? When there is a medical emergency in the City of Carmel-by-the-Sea, usually the fire engine with a three-person crew will arrive first on the scene and will begin treatment at the Basic Life Support (BLS) level. All of the City’s fire fighters are certified Emergency Medical Technicians (EMTs) and can perform service at the BLS level. This level of service can include the application of a number of emergency medical skills and services depending upon the situation found at the scene.
These include:
• Evaluate the ill and injured;
• Obtain diagnostic signs including temperature, blood pressure, pulse and respiration rates, level of consciousness and pupil status;
• Perform CPR, if needed, including the use of mechanical adjuncts to this process;
• Use of different types of adjunctive airway breathing aids, such promoting airways, basic oxygen delivery services, and manual and mechanical ventilating devices designed for pre-hospital use;
• Use of stretchers and body immobilization devices;
• Initial pre-hospital emergency care of trauma;
• Administer oral glucose or sugar solutions;
• Extricate entrapped persons;
• Perform field triage;
• Assist ALS procedures upon arrival and with the direction of a paramedic.
After the Fire Engine with its three-person crew arrives and provides emergency medical care, which can include some or all of the above described services, there may be a need for Advanced Life Support (ALS). This can be provided by the subsequently arriving ambulance which is staffed by paramedic fire fighters. If ALS service is not required, the fire engine crew will complete medical aid at the scene in a “treat and release” mode.
After the service is rendered, the insurance company and/or Medicare is billed. This billing function would be consolidated with the staff who currently files ambulance charges. It is suggested that the same debt collection agency used by CRFA also be used for these bills. This would promote the efficiency of the billing function and add only an incremental cost to bill collection, with most of that expense absorbed by existing staff.
Amount of the Fee. The cost of providing BLS service is estimated to cost $300 per call. This expense is based on the hourly salary and benefit rate of the three fire fighters plus administrative overhead. There is also included an hourly engine rate based on California Emergency Management Agency’s reimbursement rates. The expense per call is somewhat greater than the proposed $250 per incident fee for this service.
Any resolution adopted by the Council implementing this fee should make it clear that the fee is only for the cost of firefighter time and their engine in responding to and addressing a medical emergency and does not cover the cost of medical supplies, medical equipment, specialized medical radio communication equipment, and the training and certification of first responders. It also does not apply to paramedic ambulances staffed with at least one paramedic. These expenses cannot be reimbursed by this fee since they are already covered by funds collected and distributed by CSA 74 via a MOU of which Carmel is a signatory. The source of the CSA 74 funds is a $12 parcel tax; therefore a fee cannot be charged to cover these CSA 74 MOU expenses.
As pointed out earlier, this fee will allow the City to recover this expense from insurance and Medi-Cal, with its collection accomplished by the same process and personnel by which ambulance charges are collected.
Comparable Practice. While no cities in Monterey County collect this fee, many cities in the state charge an EMS fee of $250 – $350 per call. In some cities this is called an “assessment fee” but the fire department service is often substantially beyond an initial assessment.
These cities include both Charter and General Law cities. Therefore, there is no requirement that the fee can only be collected by Charter cities. General Law cities like Carmel-by-the-Sea may also can implement this fee.
Estimated Revenue. Initially, in Supplemental Budget Memo #2 a rough estimate of revenue from this fee was $92,285. It was pointed out that this was a “rough” estimate, particularly since the EMS incident data would need to be refined. There were more than 800 EMS calls reported in 2010, and a limited number were eliminated as clearly not applicable to this fee (arrival at scene with no victims, for example). But there was a need to further refine the incident calls to determine which ones were applicable to this fee. This review process has now reduced the number of EMS incident calls to 388 during 2010.
Using this number the estimated revenue from this new fee is a projected $42,640. This is based on 388 calls with a collection rate of .47 which is similar to the rate collected for the local ambulance service as well as other cities with this program. The revenue from this fee is estimated with 388 incidents x $250 x .47 = $45,590 less $2,963 for collection expense = $42,627.
Implementation. Besides the normal steps of setting up the billing process for this fee, it is suggested that, if adopted, implementation of this fee be delayed one month in order to inform the public about the fee.
RECOMMENDATION
It is recommended that the City Council adopt the Resolution implementing a fire department emergency service medical fee.
Showing posts with label Carmel Fire Department. Show all posts
Showing posts with label Carmel Fire Department. Show all posts
Saturday, July 30, 2011
Monday, June 13, 2011
CITY COUNCIL: Closed Session & Special Meeting & 2011-12 Supplemental Budget Memos #1 - #7
UPDATE: Special City Council Budget Workshop – 4:30 p.m.
Tuesday, June 21, 2011
Council Chambers
ABSTRACT: A Closed Session and Special Meeting is scheduled for Tuesday, June 14, 2011 at 4:00 P.M. in Council Chambers at City Hall. The Amended Agenda is reproduced. For the public meeting, Interim City Administrator John Goss and Staff have prepared seven FY 2011/2012 SUPPLEMENTAL BUDGET MEMOS; the document is embedded. The Supplemental Budget Memos, as follows:
2011-12 SUPPLEMENTAL BUDGET MEMO #1 BUDGET QUESTIONS AND ANSWERS is organized into sections, including Personnel (Q & A 1-16), Specific City Services (Q & A 17-22), Public Safety (Q & A 23–40), Marketing (Q & A 41 – 47), Trolley (Q & A 48–50), Revenues & Cost Saving Measures (Q & A Paid Parking 51, Q & A Parking In-lieu Reserve Fund Q & A 52–54, Hostelry Tax (Transit Occupancy Tax) Q & A 55-56, Fees Q & A 57–58), Other (Q & A 59–62), Transfers and Reserves (Q & A 63–67), Grant Funding (Q & A 68–71), Capital Improvement Projects & Capital Outlays (Q & A 72–99) and Other Budget Questions (Q & A 100 – 116).
SUPPLEMENTAL BUDGET MEMO #2 is organized into sections, including, POTENTIAL FEE INCREASES, PARKING CITATION FEES AND FINES, EMERGENCY MEDICAL SERVICE (EMS) FEE, MISCELLANEOUS FEES (Parks and Beach, Streets, Banners), OTHER CHARGES (Norton Court Senior Parking), RECOMMENDATIONS and FISCAL IMPACT. Recommendations include:
1. Parking Citation Fees and Fines be increased $5.00 per citation;
2. Staff be given direction to explore in more detail for Council consideration creating an Emergency Medical Service Fee;
3. Miscellaneous Fees related to parks, streets and banners be adopted; and
4. The charge for Norton Court Senior Parking be increased from $285 to $350 per quarter.
SUPPLEMENTAL BUDGET MEMO #3; GRANTS consists of City of Carmel-by-the-Sea Status of Grant-funded Projects and Pending Applications table, Sunset Cultural Center, Inc. Status of Grant-funded Projects and Pending Applications, Carmel Art; Film Festival Status of Grant-funded Projects and Pending Applications.
SUPPLEMENTAL BUDGET MEMO #4; APPLICATION OF CONSTRUCTION ACTIVITY ROAD IMPACT FEE TO 2011-12 BUDGET.
SUPPLEMENTAL BUDGET MEMO #5, PROPERTY ASSESSMENTS including chart.
SUPPLEMENTAL BUDGET MEMO #6, FIRE DEPARTMENT QUESTIONS consists of sections including Constant Staffing, Minimum/Maximum Staffing, Advantages of Constant Staffing, Operational Changes.
SUPPLEMENTAL BUDGET MEMO #7, ADJUSTMENTS TO PROPOSED 2011-12 BUDGET, including adjustment items Liability Insurance, Workers Compensation Insurance, Workers Comp. Self-Funded Claims, Regional Destination Marketing, Police, Police Overtime and Dues and Memberships.
SUPPLEMENTAL BUDGET MEMOS 1-7 2011
SUPPLEMENTAL BUDGET MEMOS #1 - #7 2011
CARMEL-BY-THE-SEA CITY COUNCIL
Closed Session and Special Meeting --Amended
Tuesday, June 14, 2011 -- 4:00 p.m.
Council Chambers
East side of Monte Verde Street between
Ocean and Seventh Avenues
Live video streaming available at:
http://carmel.granicus.com/ViewPublisher.php?view_id=2
Broadcast date--Sunday, June 19, 2011
8:00 a.m., MCAET Channel 26
I. Call to Order
II. Roll Call
III. Pledge of Allegiance
IV. Adjourn to Closed Session
Pursuant to Government Code Section 54965 et seq. of the State of California, the City Council will adjourn to Closed Session to consider the following:
1. Labor Negotiations – Gov’t. Code Section 54957.6(a) Meet and confer with the Carmel-by-the-Sea’s Meyers-Milias Brown Act representative, Interim City Administrator Goss, to give direction regarding labor negotiations with the International Association of Firefighters and LIUNA/UPEC Local 792.
V. Announcements in Open Session (if any)
VI. Consent Agenda
A. Consideration of a Resolution approving a waiver of City fees associated with the interior remodel of the Golden Bough Playhouse.
B. Consideration of a Resolution approving the grant application to the Monterey Bay Unified Air Pollution Control District for $65,000 for the continuation of the Carmel-by-the-Sea trolley service.
C. Review and approve a letter from the Mayor to the Monterey Bay Unified Air Pollution Control District requesting delay of a decision on Thresholds of Significance for Greenhouse Gasses.
VII. Orders of Council
A. Study session and public hearing to review/adopt Fiscal Years 2011/12 – 2013/14 Triennial Budget.
VIII. Adjournment
The City of Carmel-by-the-Sea does not discriminate against persons with disabilities. Carmel-by-the-Sea City Hall is an accessible facility. The City of Carmel-by-the-Sea telecommunications device for the Deaf/Speech Impaired (T.D.D.) number is 1-800-735-2929.
Tuesday, June 21, 2011
Council Chambers
ABSTRACT: A Closed Session and Special Meeting is scheduled for Tuesday, June 14, 2011 at 4:00 P.M. in Council Chambers at City Hall. The Amended Agenda is reproduced. For the public meeting, Interim City Administrator John Goss and Staff have prepared seven FY 2011/2012 SUPPLEMENTAL BUDGET MEMOS; the document is embedded. The Supplemental Budget Memos, as follows:
2011-12 SUPPLEMENTAL BUDGET MEMO #1 BUDGET QUESTIONS AND ANSWERS is organized into sections, including Personnel (Q & A 1-16), Specific City Services (Q & A 17-22), Public Safety (Q & A 23–40), Marketing (Q & A 41 – 47), Trolley (Q & A 48–50), Revenues & Cost Saving Measures (Q & A Paid Parking 51, Q & A Parking In-lieu Reserve Fund Q & A 52–54, Hostelry Tax (Transit Occupancy Tax) Q & A 55-56, Fees Q & A 57–58), Other (Q & A 59–62), Transfers and Reserves (Q & A 63–67), Grant Funding (Q & A 68–71), Capital Improvement Projects & Capital Outlays (Q & A 72–99) and Other Budget Questions (Q & A 100 – 116).
SUPPLEMENTAL BUDGET MEMO #2 is organized into sections, including, POTENTIAL FEE INCREASES, PARKING CITATION FEES AND FINES, EMERGENCY MEDICAL SERVICE (EMS) FEE, MISCELLANEOUS FEES (Parks and Beach, Streets, Banners), OTHER CHARGES (Norton Court Senior Parking), RECOMMENDATIONS and FISCAL IMPACT. Recommendations include:
1. Parking Citation Fees and Fines be increased $5.00 per citation;
2. Staff be given direction to explore in more detail for Council consideration creating an Emergency Medical Service Fee;
3. Miscellaneous Fees related to parks, streets and banners be adopted; and
4. The charge for Norton Court Senior Parking be increased from $285 to $350 per quarter.
SUPPLEMENTAL BUDGET MEMO #3; GRANTS consists of City of Carmel-by-the-Sea Status of Grant-funded Projects and Pending Applications table, Sunset Cultural Center, Inc. Status of Grant-funded Projects and Pending Applications, Carmel Art; Film Festival Status of Grant-funded Projects and Pending Applications.
SUPPLEMENTAL BUDGET MEMO #4; APPLICATION OF CONSTRUCTION ACTIVITY ROAD IMPACT FEE TO 2011-12 BUDGET.
SUPPLEMENTAL BUDGET MEMO #5, PROPERTY ASSESSMENTS including chart.
SUPPLEMENTAL BUDGET MEMO #6, FIRE DEPARTMENT QUESTIONS consists of sections including Constant Staffing, Minimum/Maximum Staffing, Advantages of Constant Staffing, Operational Changes.
SUPPLEMENTAL BUDGET MEMO #7, ADJUSTMENTS TO PROPOSED 2011-12 BUDGET, including adjustment items Liability Insurance, Workers Compensation Insurance, Workers Comp. Self-Funded Claims, Regional Destination Marketing, Police, Police Overtime and Dues and Memberships.
SUPPLEMENTAL BUDGET MEMOS 1-7 2011
SUPPLEMENTAL BUDGET MEMOS #1 - #7 2011
CARMEL-BY-THE-SEA CITY COUNCIL
Closed Session and Special Meeting --Amended
Tuesday, June 14, 2011 -- 4:00 p.m.
Council Chambers
East side of Monte Verde Street between
Ocean and Seventh Avenues
Live video streaming available at:
http://carmel.granicus.com/ViewPublisher.php?view_id=2
Broadcast date--Sunday, June 19, 2011
8:00 a.m., MCAET Channel 26
I. Call to Order
II. Roll Call
III. Pledge of Allegiance
IV. Adjourn to Closed Session
Pursuant to Government Code Section 54965 et seq. of the State of California, the City Council will adjourn to Closed Session to consider the following:
1. Labor Negotiations – Gov’t. Code Section 54957.6(a) Meet and confer with the Carmel-by-the-Sea’s Meyers-Milias Brown Act representative, Interim City Administrator Goss, to give direction regarding labor negotiations with the International Association of Firefighters and LIUNA/UPEC Local 792.
V. Announcements in Open Session (if any)
VI. Consent Agenda
A. Consideration of a Resolution approving a waiver of City fees associated with the interior remodel of the Golden Bough Playhouse.
B. Consideration of a Resolution approving the grant application to the Monterey Bay Unified Air Pollution Control District for $65,000 for the continuation of the Carmel-by-the-Sea trolley service.
C. Review and approve a letter from the Mayor to the Monterey Bay Unified Air Pollution Control District requesting delay of a decision on Thresholds of Significance for Greenhouse Gasses.
VII. Orders of Council
A. Study session and public hearing to review/adopt Fiscal Years 2011/12 – 2013/14 Triennial Budget.
VIII. Adjournment
The City of Carmel-by-the-Sea does not discriminate against persons with disabilities. Carmel-by-the-Sea City Hall is an accessible facility. The City of Carmel-by-the-Sea telecommunications device for the Deaf/Speech Impaired (T.D.D.) number is 1-800-735-2929.
Monday, April 25, 2011
Three Special City Council Meetings: Interviews with representatives of selected firms interested in conducting the recruitment of the City Administrator & Fire Service Alternatives Workshop
ABSTRACT: Three Special City Council Meetings are scheduled this week to discuss “Interviews with representatives of selected firms interested in conducting the recruitment of the City Administrator” on Wednesday, April 27, 2011 @ 12:00 P.M. and Saturday, April 30, 2011 @ 9:00 A.M., and Fire Service Alternatives Workshop on Thursday, April 28, 2011 @ 5:00 P.M., Council Chambers. The NOTICES are reproduced.
NOTICE OF SPECIAL CITY COUNCIL MEETING
Wednesday, April 27, 2011
12 noon
Council Chambers
East side of Monte Verde Street between
Ocean and Seventh Avenues
Live video streaming available at:
www.ci.carmel.ca.us
I. Call to Order
II. Roll Call
III. Pledge of Allegiance
IV. Orders of Council
A. Interviews with representatives of selected firms interested in conducting the recruitment of the City Administrator.
V. Adjournment
SPECIAL CITY COUNCIL MEETING APRIL 28 2011
This is a workshop to discuss the contract management of the Carmel Fire Department
Copies of the documents can be had from Copies-by-the-Sea or City Hall.
NOTICE OF SPECIAL CITY COUNCIL MEETING
Saturday, April 30, 2011
9:00 a.m.
Council Chambers
East side of Monte Verde Street between
Ocean and Seventh Avenues
Live video streaming available at:
www.ci.carmel.ca.us
I. Call to Order
II. Roll Call
III. Pledge of Allegiance
IV. Orders of Council
A. Interviews with representatives of selected firms interested in conducting the recruitment of the City Administrator.
V. Adjournment
NOTICE OF SPECIAL CITY COUNCIL MEETING
Wednesday, April 27, 2011
12 noon
Council Chambers
East side of Monte Verde Street between
Ocean and Seventh Avenues
Live video streaming available at:
www.ci.carmel.ca.us
I. Call to Order
II. Roll Call
III. Pledge of Allegiance
IV. Orders of Council
A. Interviews with representatives of selected firms interested in conducting the recruitment of the City Administrator.
V. Adjournment
SPECIAL CITY COUNCIL MEETING APRIL 28 2011
This is a workshop to discuss the contract management of the Carmel Fire Department
Copies of the documents can be had from Copies-by-the-Sea or City Hall.
NOTICE OF SPECIAL CITY COUNCIL MEETING
Saturday, April 30, 2011
9:00 a.m.
Council Chambers
East side of Monte Verde Street between
Ocean and Seventh Avenues
Live video streaming available at:
www.ci.carmel.ca.us
I. Call to Order
II. Roll Call
III. Pledge of Allegiance
IV. Orders of Council
A. Interviews with representatives of selected firms interested in conducting the recruitment of the City Administrator.
V. Adjournment
Thursday, April 21, 2011
FIRE SERVICE ALTERNATIVES Report & Workshop
ABSTRACT: The FIRE SERVICE ALTERNATIVES Report prepared by GEORGE E. RAWSON, DIRECTOR OF PUBLIC SAFETY (RET.), dated April 17, 2011, “focuses on alternative models of how fire protection services can be administered, and does not include the Carmel Regional Fire Ambulance component.” The FIRE SERVICE OPTIONS include STAND ALONE MODEL, MONTEREY FIRE CONTRACT and CAL FIRE CONTRACT. The SUMMARY states: “In summary, the stand-alone model is more costly and provides substantially fewer personnel and equipment resources versus the JPA or fire service contract alternatives. Although the JPA model is a promising alternative, the ability to implement this option in the near future makes this an impractical alternative at this time. It is recommended the city focus on contract fire services as the preferred alternative while maintaining the option to participate in a fire services JPA in the future.” An abbreviated summary of the Carmel-by-the-Sea Fire Service Cost Estimate Comparison table is presented. And the Comparative Analysis of Fire Service Options table, including all fourteen FACTORS (Emergency response standard (first unit on scene); Emergency response standard (structure fire); Availability of qualified chief officer for incident command; Station staffing; Fire Inspection services; Control over service levels and costs; Governance / local control; Capability to share other local City services; Workforce stability; Financial risk; Existing liability for retiree medical benefits; Ease of implementation; sustainability; Labor support and Employee Pre-employment background investigation) is reproduced. Importantly, Monterey and Carmel fire associations fully support the MONTEREY FIRE CONTRACT option. The intent of the report is “to facilitate preliminary discussion and public input.” The City’s FIRE SERVICE ALTERNATIVES Packet is embedded, including the Fire Services Proposal For the City of Carmel-by-the-Sea from the City of Monterey, Fire Department, March 31, 2011 and Service Options for the City of Carmel-by-the-Sea, CAL FIRE San Benito – Monterey Unit Richard C. Hutchinson Jr., Unit Chief, April 28, 2011. The 5-Year Totals for STAND ALONE MODEL, MONTEREY FIRE CONTRACT and CAL FIRE CONTRACT are $12,813,077, $9,560,633 and $8,686,017, respectively. A Fire Services Workshop is scheduled for Thursday, April 28, at 5:00 P.M., City Hall Chambers.
Carmel-by-the-Sea Fire Service Cost Estimate Comparison
OPTION #1: STAND ALONE MODEL
FY 11/12 Total $ 2,604,535
FY 12/13 Total $ 2,490,098
FY 13/14 Total $ 2,564,135
FY 14/15 Total $ 2,574,833
FY 15/16 Total $ 2,579,476
5-Year Total $ 12,813,077
Note: Total excludes CRFA subsidy and leases
OPTION #2: MONTEREY FIRE CONTRACT
FY 11/12 Total $ 1,928,541
FY 12/13 Total $ 1,852,083
FY 13/14 Total $ 1,909,541
FY 14/15 Total $ 1,928,734
FY 15/16 Total $ 1,941,734
5-Year Total $ 9,560,633
Note: Total excludes CRFA subsidy and leases
OPTION #3: CAL FIRE CONTRACT
FY 11/12 TOTAL $ 1,801,437
FY 12/13 Total $ 1,704,625
FY 13/14 Total $ 1,708,089
FY 14/15 Total $ 1,733,091
FY 15/16 Total$ 1,738,775
5-Year Total $ 8,686,017
Note: Total excludes CRFA subsidy and leases
Comparative Analysis of Fire Service Options
FACTOR: Emergency response standard (first unit on scene
STAND ALONE Response time is 3 to 5 minutes on 90% of calls.
MONTEREY Response time is 3 to 5 minutes on 90% of calls.
CAL FIRE Response time is 3 to 5 minutes on 90% of calls.
FACTOR: Emergency response standard (structure fire)
STAND ALONE 1 engine, 1 ambulance, and 1 chief officer (6 personnel).
MONTEREY 4 engines, 1 aerial apparatus, 1 ambulance and 1 chief officer (min. 18 personnel)
CAL FIRE 4 engines, 1 aerial apparatus, 1ambulance and 1 chief officer (min. 18 personnel)
FACTOR: Availability of qualified chief officer for incident command
STAND ALONE City establishes criteria for availability.
MONTEREY Available within 10 minutes of Carmel at all times.
CAL FIRE Available within 10 minutes of Carmel at all times.
FACTOR: Station staffing
STAND ALONE 1 engine company with 3 personnel; backfill with off-duty personnel as available.
MONTEREY 1 engine company with 3 personnel; will backfill Carmel station when Carmel engine is committed.
CAL FIRE 1 engine company with 3 personnel; will backfill Carmel station when Carmel engine is committed.
FACTOR: Fire Inspection services
STAND ALONE As established and funded by City.
MONTEREY Contract includes inspection services by Monterey Fire Prevention staff.
CAL FIRE Contract offers dedicated inspection staff plus on-duty engine crew
FACTOR: Control over service levels and costs
STAND ALONE Most control over service levels and costs.
MONTEREY City determines service level desired in collaboration with Monterey; somewhat more influence on costs than state model
CAL FIRE City determines service level desired; no control over state personnel salary & benefits costs.
FACTOR: Governance/local control
STAND ALONE City retains the most control with this option.
MONTEREY Local city to city partnership building on existing relationships and agreements. Fire Chief has track record of being responsive to Carmel standards.
CAL FIRE State/local government partnership subject to state’s oversight authority. Local area CALFIRE Unit Chief has authority to tailor fire protection proposal to meet Carmel standards.
FACTOR: Capability to share other local City services
STAND ALONE Not applicable
MONTEREY Significant potential to share other municipal services
CAL FIRE None
FACTOR: Workforce stability
STAND ALONE City has full control of employees; historically very stable workforce.
MONTEREY Majority of fire staff lives within Monterey County and is heavily involved in local activities; may result in lower turnover rate than state model.
CAL FIRE State agency with employees recruited throughout state; ability to transfer in and out of Carmel and local area at any time.
FACTOR: Financial risk
STAND ALONE More costly than contract alternative; city retains most control of costs with this alternative.
MONTEREY Proven local government partnership; likely somewhat more influence over costs than state model.
CAL FIRE State budget uncertainties do exist. City maintains right to pay costs for level of fire services city desires.
FACTOR: Existing liability for retiree medical benefits
STAND ALONE None
MONTEREY None
CAL FIRE CAL FIRE’s share of State’s unfunded retiree medical obligations not included in proposal; Retiree benefit calculated on basis of state employee service; city years of service excluded from benefit calculation.
FACTOR: Ease of implementation; sustainability
STAND ALONE Likely more complex than contract model.
MONTEREY Proven local contract partnerships; many of the required implementation steps have been completed to minimize transition period; likely quickest implementation.
CAL FIRE Proven experience with implementing contracts. May result in longer implementation period due to collective bargaining process yet to be completed.
FACTOR: Labor support
STAND ALONE Carmel Firefighter’s Association does not support this model.
MONTEREY Monterey and Carmel fire associations fully support this alternative.
CAL FIRE Unknown, however CAL FIRE firefighters union has previously opposed CAL FIRE contracting with Pacific Grove.
FACTOR: Familiarity with local structures and needs
STAND ALONE Carmel firefighters are well-acquainted with Carmel’s unique characteristics.
MONTEREY Carmel and Monterey Firefighters currently conduct joint training and are familiar with Carmel’s unique characteristics.
CAL FIRE Current Carmel firefighters remain assigned to the CFD as CAL FIRE employees. However, they have future discretion to transfer anywhere in the State. New staff must be trained on Carmel’s unique characteristics.
FACTOR: Termination of Fire Services Agreement
STAND ALONE Not applicable
MONTEREY 12 months’ termination notice required; payment for unpaid transferred leave balances due upon termination.
CAL FIRE 12 months’ termination notice required; no fiscal liability for transferred leave balances upon termination.
FACTOR: Employee Pre-employment background investigation
STAND ALONE All employees hired and promoted are subject to comprehensive background and psychological evaluation.
MONTEREY All employees hired and promoted are subject to comprehensive background and psychological evaluation.
CAL FIRE No agency specific requirements for pre-employment background checks, but criminal history checks are performed pursuant to State EMT employment regulations.
City FIRE SERVICE ALTERNATIVES April 2011
FIRE SERVICE ALTERNATIVES April 2011
Carmel-by-the-Sea Fire Service Cost Estimate Comparison
OPTION #1: STAND ALONE MODEL
FY 11/12 Total $ 2,604,535
FY 12/13 Total $ 2,490,098
FY 13/14 Total $ 2,564,135
FY 14/15 Total $ 2,574,833
FY 15/16 Total $ 2,579,476
5-Year Total $ 12,813,077
Note: Total excludes CRFA subsidy and leases
OPTION #2: MONTEREY FIRE CONTRACT
FY 11/12 Total $ 1,928,541
FY 12/13 Total $ 1,852,083
FY 13/14 Total $ 1,909,541
FY 14/15 Total $ 1,928,734
FY 15/16 Total $ 1,941,734
5-Year Total $ 9,560,633
Note: Total excludes CRFA subsidy and leases
OPTION #3: CAL FIRE CONTRACT
FY 11/12 TOTAL $ 1,801,437
FY 12/13 Total $ 1,704,625
FY 13/14 Total $ 1,708,089
FY 14/15 Total $ 1,733,091
FY 15/16 Total$ 1,738,775
5-Year Total $ 8,686,017
Note: Total excludes CRFA subsidy and leases
Comparative Analysis of Fire Service Options
FACTOR: Emergency response standard (first unit on scene
STAND ALONE Response time is 3 to 5 minutes on 90% of calls.
MONTEREY Response time is 3 to 5 minutes on 90% of calls.
CAL FIRE Response time is 3 to 5 minutes on 90% of calls.
FACTOR: Emergency response standard (structure fire)
STAND ALONE 1 engine, 1 ambulance, and 1 chief officer (6 personnel).
MONTEREY 4 engines, 1 aerial apparatus, 1 ambulance and 1 chief officer (min. 18 personnel)
CAL FIRE 4 engines, 1 aerial apparatus, 1ambulance and 1 chief officer (min. 18 personnel)
FACTOR: Availability of qualified chief officer for incident command
STAND ALONE City establishes criteria for availability.
MONTEREY Available within 10 minutes of Carmel at all times.
CAL FIRE Available within 10 minutes of Carmel at all times.
FACTOR: Station staffing
STAND ALONE 1 engine company with 3 personnel; backfill with off-duty personnel as available.
MONTEREY 1 engine company with 3 personnel; will backfill Carmel station when Carmel engine is committed.
CAL FIRE 1 engine company with 3 personnel; will backfill Carmel station when Carmel engine is committed.
FACTOR: Fire Inspection services
STAND ALONE As established and funded by City.
MONTEREY Contract includes inspection services by Monterey Fire Prevention staff.
CAL FIRE Contract offers dedicated inspection staff plus on-duty engine crew
FACTOR: Control over service levels and costs
STAND ALONE Most control over service levels and costs.
MONTEREY City determines service level desired in collaboration with Monterey; somewhat more influence on costs than state model
CAL FIRE City determines service level desired; no control over state personnel salary & benefits costs.
FACTOR: Governance/local control
STAND ALONE City retains the most control with this option.
MONTEREY Local city to city partnership building on existing relationships and agreements. Fire Chief has track record of being responsive to Carmel standards.
CAL FIRE State/local government partnership subject to state’s oversight authority. Local area CALFIRE Unit Chief has authority to tailor fire protection proposal to meet Carmel standards.
FACTOR: Capability to share other local City services
STAND ALONE Not applicable
MONTEREY Significant potential to share other municipal services
CAL FIRE None
FACTOR: Workforce stability
STAND ALONE City has full control of employees; historically very stable workforce.
MONTEREY Majority of fire staff lives within Monterey County and is heavily involved in local activities; may result in lower turnover rate than state model.
CAL FIRE State agency with employees recruited throughout state; ability to transfer in and out of Carmel and local area at any time.
FACTOR: Financial risk
STAND ALONE More costly than contract alternative; city retains most control of costs with this alternative.
MONTEREY Proven local government partnership; likely somewhat more influence over costs than state model.
CAL FIRE State budget uncertainties do exist. City maintains right to pay costs for level of fire services city desires.
FACTOR: Existing liability for retiree medical benefits
STAND ALONE None
MONTEREY None
CAL FIRE CAL FIRE’s share of State’s unfunded retiree medical obligations not included in proposal; Retiree benefit calculated on basis of state employee service; city years of service excluded from benefit calculation.
FACTOR: Ease of implementation; sustainability
STAND ALONE Likely more complex than contract model.
MONTEREY Proven local contract partnerships; many of the required implementation steps have been completed to minimize transition period; likely quickest implementation.
CAL FIRE Proven experience with implementing contracts. May result in longer implementation period due to collective bargaining process yet to be completed.
FACTOR: Labor support
STAND ALONE Carmel Firefighter’s Association does not support this model.
MONTEREY Monterey and Carmel fire associations fully support this alternative.
CAL FIRE Unknown, however CAL FIRE firefighters union has previously opposed CAL FIRE contracting with Pacific Grove.
FACTOR: Familiarity with local structures and needs
STAND ALONE Carmel firefighters are well-acquainted with Carmel’s unique characteristics.
MONTEREY Carmel and Monterey Firefighters currently conduct joint training and are familiar with Carmel’s unique characteristics.
CAL FIRE Current Carmel firefighters remain assigned to the CFD as CAL FIRE employees. However, they have future discretion to transfer anywhere in the State. New staff must be trained on Carmel’s unique characteristics.
FACTOR: Termination of Fire Services Agreement
STAND ALONE Not applicable
MONTEREY 12 months’ termination notice required; payment for unpaid transferred leave balances due upon termination.
CAL FIRE 12 months’ termination notice required; no fiscal liability for transferred leave balances upon termination.
FACTOR: Employee Pre-employment background investigation
STAND ALONE All employees hired and promoted are subject to comprehensive background and psychological evaluation.
MONTEREY All employees hired and promoted are subject to comprehensive background and psychological evaluation.
CAL FIRE No agency specific requirements for pre-employment background checks, but criminal history checks are performed pursuant to State EMT employment regulations.
City FIRE SERVICE ALTERNATIVES April 2011
FIRE SERVICE ALTERNATIVES April 2011
Friday, April 08, 2011
‘MINUTES’ for Seven Noteworthy 5 April 2011 City Council Agenda Items
“MINUTES”
REGULAR CITY COUNCIL MEETING
CITY OF CARMEL-BY-THE-SEA
Tuesday, April 5, 2011
Archived video streaming
City Hall
East side of Monte Verde Street between Ocean and Seventh Avenues
II. ROLL CALL
PRESENT: Council Members Burnett, Hazdovac, Sharp, Talmage, Mayor McCloud
ABSENT: None
VII. CONSENT CALENDAR
K. Authorize a letter to the County to proceed with the dissolution of the JPA-managed ambulance response agency, provide notice of intent to retain the 1797.201 rights and authorize the City to submit an application for advanced life support (ALS) certification.
L. Authorize the City to retain Bill Ross as Special Counsel to review and advise the City on ambulance services.
M. Authorize the Mayor to submit responses to the Grand Jury report on behalf of the City of Carmel-by-the-Sea.
Mayor McCloud opened the meeting to public comment.
Ken Hutchinson, Vice President, Carmel Professional Firefighters, agreed with the Civil Grand Jury report, as follows:
• the negative factors of 401(k) outweigh any potential positive factors;
• maintain participation in CalPERS with corrections to increase stability and sustainability for the future;
• a buyout is not realistic or financially viable or practical;
• all public employees have a vested right to the retirement plan which was in place at the time of hire;
• advocate for their participation in formal talks involving CalPERS prior to a final decision on fire services (if conducted), their participation is an “integral element” to process and they are dedicated to the goal of achieving a "mutually beneficial agreement in a timely manner."
Mayor McCloud closed the meeting to public comment.
Council Member TALMAGE moved to approve Consent Agenda Items M, seconded by Council Member BURNETT and carried by the following roll call vote:
AYES: COUNCIL MEMBERS: BURNETT; HAZDOVAC; SHARP; TALMAGE & McCLOUD
NOES: COUNCIL MEMBERS: NONE
ABSENT: COUNCIL MEMBERS: NONE
ABSTAIN: COUNCIL MEMBERS: NONE
VIII. Public Hearings
A. Consideration of an appeal of the Planning Commission’s decision to deny a two-unit, multi-family residential project for a site located on San Carlos Street 3 SE of 7th Avenue. The appellant is Old Mill Properties LLC.
B. Consideration of an appeal of the Planning Commission’s decision to deny a two-unit, multi-family residential project for a site located on Mission Street 3 SW of 7th Avenue. The appellant is Old Mill Properties, LLC.
City Attorney recused himself due to his ownership of property across the street from the proposed project and Council Member Ken Talmage recused himself due to his living across the street from the project.
Mayor McCloud opened and closed the meeting to public comment.
Council Member HAZDOVAC moved to continue the appeals at the request of the appellant to the 3 May 2011 City Council meeting and hire land use attorney Brian Finegan to represent the City, seconded by Council Member SHARP and carried by the following roll call vote:
AYES: COUNCIL MEMBERS: BURNETT; HAZDOVAC; SHARP; TALMAGE & McCLOUD
NOES: COUNCIL MEMBERS: NONE
ABSENT: COUNCIL MEMBERS: NONE
ABSTAIN: COUNCIL MEMBERS: NONE
X. Resolutions
C. Consideration of a Resolution to lend 30 Edward Weston photographs to the Monterey Museum of Art from May 9 through October 14, 2011 for an exhibition titled “Edward Weston, American Photographer: Landscapes, Portraits, Still Lifes, Nudes”.
Council Member Burnett recused himself due to the fact that his wife is on the Monterey Museum of Art Board.
Janet Bombard, Library Director, presented the Staff Report.
Mayor McCloud asked for clarification of dates and inclusion of La Mirada as exhibition venue.
Michael Whittington, Executive Director, stated the exhibition is a “homecoming” to celebrate the career and accomplishments of one of the great artists of the 20th century of the United States and resident of this area. Whittington encouraged the adoption of the resolution and urged the public to attend the exhibition. He stated that he anticipates a total of 120 photographs spanning Weston’s earliest career to photographs before his death.
Mayor McCloud opened and closed the meeting to public comment.
Council Member HAZDOVAC moved to approve Resolution to lend 30 Edward Weston photographs to the Monterey Museum of Art from May 9 through October 14, 2011 for an exhibition titled “Edward Weston, American Photographer: Landscapes, Portraits, Still Lifes, Nudes,” seconded by Council Member TALMAGE and carried by the following roll call vote
AYES: COUNCIL MEMBERS: HAZDOVAC; SHARP; TALMAGE & McCLOUD
NOES: COUNCIL MEMBERS: NONE
ABSENT: COUNCIL MEMBERS: NONE
ABSTAIN: COUNCIL MEMBERS: NONE:
XI. Orders of Council
A. Approve amendments to City’s revised Harassment Prevention Policy.
Attorney Jon Giffen, Kennedy, Archer & Harray, presented changes to the Third Draft of the City’s revised Harassment Prevention Policy, including, as follows (changes in bold):
• IV. TYPES OF HARASSMENT PROHIBITED
visual behaviors (to include other electronic communications, such as twitter)
• VI. COMPLAINT PROCEDURE
1) Employee’s Responsibility When Subjected to Harassment
Any employee who believes he or she has been subjected to harassment prohibited by this policy is required to immediately report that behavior to any one of the following individuals: his or her supervisor; the City’s Human Resources Personnel Officer (“Personnel Officer”); the City Administrator; or the Mayor or Vice Mayor or any city council member.
• 2) Supervisor Responsibilities
If for any reason the Personnel Officer is implicated in the alleged harassment or is otherwise unavailable to respond to the complaint, then the supervisor must report the harassing behavior to either the City Administrator, the Mayor or the Vice Mayor or any city council member instead of the Personnel Officer. In those instances, either the City Administrator, Mayor or Vice Mayor or any city council member will be responsible for meeting with the complainant as specified in the preceding paragraph.
• 3) Investigating Officer’s Responsibilities
The Investigating Officer will have the duty to immediately bring all harassment and/or retaliation complaints to the confidential attention of the City Administrator, the Mayor or Vice Mayor or any city council member.
• C) General Investigation Guidelines
5. If during the course of the investigation, the alleged harassment is reported to be continuing, the Investigating Officer must notify the City Administrator, the Mayor or Vice Mayor or any council member who will take such emergency or immediate action as may be necessary or appropriate under the circumstances.
• C) General Investigation Guidelines
6. At the conclusion of the investigation, the Investigating Officer must prepare a written report of his/her findings as soon as reasonably possible but in no event later than 30 days from completion of the investigation. If, at the conclusion of the investigation, it is found that harassment has occurred, the Investigating Officer must forward his or her written findings, along with any recommendations to the City Administrator, Mayor or Vice Mayor, or any city council member for implementation of the disciplinary process, if any.
• VII. MISCELLANEOUS GUIDELINES
1) Complaints Against Volunteers or City Council Appointees
Employees who believe they have been harassed by any of the above must follow the complaint procedure previously specified including immediately reporting that behavior to any one of the following individuals: his or her supervisor; the City’s Human Resources Personnel Officer; the City Administrator; or the Mayor; or any city council member.
• 2. If the alleged harasser is a member of a Board, Commission, or Committee, or is the City Attorney, the City Engineer, or City Treasurer: the report must be given to the Mayor, the Vice Mayor and the City Administrator or any city council member. The Mayor or Vice Mayor will oversee implementation of appropriate disciplinary action.
• 3. If the alleged harasser is the City Administrator: the report must be given to the Mayor or Vice Mayor or any city council member. The Mayor or Vice Mayor must review the findings and make recommendations accordingly to the entire City Council.
• 2) Complaints Against Elected Officials
This policy applies equally to the Mayor, the Vice Mayor and members of the City Council. Employees who believe they have been harassed by an elected official must follow the complaint procedure previously specified including immediately reporting that behavior to any one of the following individuals: his or her supervisor; the Personnel Officer; the City Administrator; or the Mayor or Vice Mayor or any city council member.
• 3) Complaints Against Outside Parties (Non-Employees)
If the complaint is against an outside party or other non-employee not previously addressed in this policy, then the complainant must follow the complaint procedure previously specified including immediately reporting that behavior to any one of the following individuals: his or her supervisor; the Personnel Officer; the City Administrator; or the Mayor or Vice Mayor or any city council member.
Council Member Talmage referred to a memo from the General Employee Association concerning a potential violation of the “meet and confer” process received by the City Council at the time of the meeting.
City Attorney Don Freeman implied that there was not a violation of “meet and confer” because the policy is an ordinance which is not a negotiable item and not therefore not subject to negotiation.
Council Member Burnett expressed concern about the concerns the City employees expressed in the memo.
Assistant City Administrator/City Clerk Heidi Burch stated that all City associates, unions and all at-will employees received the draft policy in response to Council Member Talmage’s query.
Mayor McCloud opened the meeting to public comment.
Adam Moniz stated that the City’s Harassment Prevention Policy is “only as good as your commitment to enforce it.”
Mayor McCloud closed the meeting to public comment.
Attorney Jon Giffen addressed Carolyn Hardy’s concern about favoritism, “favoritism” not included in IV. TYPES OF HARASSMENT PROHIBITED and not contained in the draft policy.
Council Member Burnett expressed concern about City employees’ questions and Jon Giffen’s answers which stated “No further changes contemplated.”
Council Member Paula Hazdovac expressed concern about employee union question about person wrongfully accused of harassment and administrative leave.
City Attorney Don Freeman stated the City has a zero tolerance for harassment policy. Freeman advocated finalizing policy one time.
Council Member Talmage suggested that memo be responded to, to include draft policy to associations, unions and all at-will employees, and call for comments by date certain.
Council Member Hazdovac suggested employees’ responses by Friday, April 22.
Attorney Jon Giffen agreed to rewrite draft policy by April 26.
The City’s amended revised Harassment Prevention Policy will appear on the City Council’s 3 May 2011 Meeting.
REGULAR CITY COUNCIL MEETING
CITY OF CARMEL-BY-THE-SEA
Tuesday, April 5, 2011
Archived video streaming
City Hall
East side of Monte Verde Street between Ocean and Seventh Avenues
II. ROLL CALL
PRESENT: Council Members Burnett, Hazdovac, Sharp, Talmage, Mayor McCloud
ABSENT: None
VII. CONSENT CALENDAR
K. Authorize a letter to the County to proceed with the dissolution of the JPA-managed ambulance response agency, provide notice of intent to retain the 1797.201 rights and authorize the City to submit an application for advanced life support (ALS) certification.
L. Authorize the City to retain Bill Ross as Special Counsel to review and advise the City on ambulance services.
M. Authorize the Mayor to submit responses to the Grand Jury report on behalf of the City of Carmel-by-the-Sea.
Mayor McCloud opened the meeting to public comment.
Ken Hutchinson, Vice President, Carmel Professional Firefighters, agreed with the Civil Grand Jury report, as follows:
• the negative factors of 401(k) outweigh any potential positive factors;
• maintain participation in CalPERS with corrections to increase stability and sustainability for the future;
• a buyout is not realistic or financially viable or practical;
• all public employees have a vested right to the retirement plan which was in place at the time of hire;
• advocate for their participation in formal talks involving CalPERS prior to a final decision on fire services (if conducted), their participation is an “integral element” to process and they are dedicated to the goal of achieving a "mutually beneficial agreement in a timely manner."
Mayor McCloud closed the meeting to public comment.
Council Member TALMAGE moved to approve Consent Agenda Items M, seconded by Council Member BURNETT and carried by the following roll call vote:
AYES: COUNCIL MEMBERS: BURNETT; HAZDOVAC; SHARP; TALMAGE & McCLOUD
NOES: COUNCIL MEMBERS: NONE
ABSENT: COUNCIL MEMBERS: NONE
ABSTAIN: COUNCIL MEMBERS: NONE
VIII. Public Hearings
A. Consideration of an appeal of the Planning Commission’s decision to deny a two-unit, multi-family residential project for a site located on San Carlos Street 3 SE of 7th Avenue. The appellant is Old Mill Properties LLC.
B. Consideration of an appeal of the Planning Commission’s decision to deny a two-unit, multi-family residential project for a site located on Mission Street 3 SW of 7th Avenue. The appellant is Old Mill Properties, LLC.
City Attorney recused himself due to his ownership of property across the street from the proposed project and Council Member Ken Talmage recused himself due to his living across the street from the project.
Mayor McCloud opened and closed the meeting to public comment.
Council Member HAZDOVAC moved to continue the appeals at the request of the appellant to the 3 May 2011 City Council meeting and hire land use attorney Brian Finegan to represent the City, seconded by Council Member SHARP and carried by the following roll call vote:
AYES: COUNCIL MEMBERS: BURNETT; HAZDOVAC; SHARP; TALMAGE & McCLOUD
NOES: COUNCIL MEMBERS: NONE
ABSENT: COUNCIL MEMBERS: NONE
ABSTAIN: COUNCIL MEMBERS: NONE
X. Resolutions
C. Consideration of a Resolution to lend 30 Edward Weston photographs to the Monterey Museum of Art from May 9 through October 14, 2011 for an exhibition titled “Edward Weston, American Photographer: Landscapes, Portraits, Still Lifes, Nudes”.
Council Member Burnett recused himself due to the fact that his wife is on the Monterey Museum of Art Board.
Janet Bombard, Library Director, presented the Staff Report.
Mayor McCloud asked for clarification of dates and inclusion of La Mirada as exhibition venue.
Michael Whittington, Executive Director, stated the exhibition is a “homecoming” to celebrate the career and accomplishments of one of the great artists of the 20th century of the United States and resident of this area. Whittington encouraged the adoption of the resolution and urged the public to attend the exhibition. He stated that he anticipates a total of 120 photographs spanning Weston’s earliest career to photographs before his death.
Mayor McCloud opened and closed the meeting to public comment.
Council Member HAZDOVAC moved to approve Resolution to lend 30 Edward Weston photographs to the Monterey Museum of Art from May 9 through October 14, 2011 for an exhibition titled “Edward Weston, American Photographer: Landscapes, Portraits, Still Lifes, Nudes,” seconded by Council Member TALMAGE and carried by the following roll call vote
AYES: COUNCIL MEMBERS: HAZDOVAC; SHARP; TALMAGE & McCLOUD
NOES: COUNCIL MEMBERS: NONE
ABSENT: COUNCIL MEMBERS: NONE
ABSTAIN: COUNCIL MEMBERS: NONE:
XI. Orders of Council
A. Approve amendments to City’s revised Harassment Prevention Policy.
Attorney Jon Giffen, Kennedy, Archer & Harray, presented changes to the Third Draft of the City’s revised Harassment Prevention Policy, including, as follows (changes in bold):
• IV. TYPES OF HARASSMENT PROHIBITED
visual behaviors (to include other electronic communications, such as twitter)
• VI. COMPLAINT PROCEDURE
1) Employee’s Responsibility When Subjected to Harassment
Any employee who believes he or she has been subjected to harassment prohibited by this policy is required to immediately report that behavior to any one of the following individuals: his or her supervisor; the City’s Human Resources Personnel Officer (“Personnel Officer”); the City Administrator; or the Mayor or Vice Mayor or any city council member.
• 2) Supervisor Responsibilities
If for any reason the Personnel Officer is implicated in the alleged harassment or is otherwise unavailable to respond to the complaint, then the supervisor must report the harassing behavior to either the City Administrator, the Mayor or the Vice Mayor or any city council member instead of the Personnel Officer. In those instances, either the City Administrator, Mayor or Vice Mayor or any city council member will be responsible for meeting with the complainant as specified in the preceding paragraph.
• 3) Investigating Officer’s Responsibilities
The Investigating Officer will have the duty to immediately bring all harassment and/or retaliation complaints to the confidential attention of the City Administrator, the Mayor or Vice Mayor or any city council member.
• C) General Investigation Guidelines
5. If during the course of the investigation, the alleged harassment is reported to be continuing, the Investigating Officer must notify the City Administrator, the Mayor or Vice Mayor or any council member who will take such emergency or immediate action as may be necessary or appropriate under the circumstances.
• C) General Investigation Guidelines
6. At the conclusion of the investigation, the Investigating Officer must prepare a written report of his/her findings as soon as reasonably possible but in no event later than 30 days from completion of the investigation. If, at the conclusion of the investigation, it is found that harassment has occurred, the Investigating Officer must forward his or her written findings, along with any recommendations to the City Administrator, Mayor or Vice Mayor, or any city council member for implementation of the disciplinary process, if any.
• VII. MISCELLANEOUS GUIDELINES
1) Complaints Against Volunteers or City Council Appointees
Employees who believe they have been harassed by any of the above must follow the complaint procedure previously specified including immediately reporting that behavior to any one of the following individuals: his or her supervisor; the City’s Human Resources Personnel Officer; the City Administrator; or the Mayor; or any city council member.
• 2. If the alleged harasser is a member of a Board, Commission, or Committee, or is the City Attorney, the City Engineer, or City Treasurer: the report must be given to the Mayor, the Vice Mayor and the City Administrator or any city council member. The Mayor or Vice Mayor will oversee implementation of appropriate disciplinary action.
• 3. If the alleged harasser is the City Administrator: the report must be given to the Mayor or Vice Mayor or any city council member. The Mayor or Vice Mayor must review the findings and make recommendations accordingly to the entire City Council.
• 2) Complaints Against Elected Officials
This policy applies equally to the Mayor, the Vice Mayor and members of the City Council. Employees who believe they have been harassed by an elected official must follow the complaint procedure previously specified including immediately reporting that behavior to any one of the following individuals: his or her supervisor; the Personnel Officer; the City Administrator; or the Mayor or Vice Mayor or any city council member.
• 3) Complaints Against Outside Parties (Non-Employees)
If the complaint is against an outside party or other non-employee not previously addressed in this policy, then the complainant must follow the complaint procedure previously specified including immediately reporting that behavior to any one of the following individuals: his or her supervisor; the Personnel Officer; the City Administrator; or the Mayor or Vice Mayor or any city council member.
Council Member Talmage referred to a memo from the General Employee Association concerning a potential violation of the “meet and confer” process received by the City Council at the time of the meeting.
City Attorney Don Freeman implied that there was not a violation of “meet and confer” because the policy is an ordinance which is not a negotiable item and not therefore not subject to negotiation.
Council Member Burnett expressed concern about the concerns the City employees expressed in the memo.
Assistant City Administrator/City Clerk Heidi Burch stated that all City associates, unions and all at-will employees received the draft policy in response to Council Member Talmage’s query.
Mayor McCloud opened the meeting to public comment.
Adam Moniz stated that the City’s Harassment Prevention Policy is “only as good as your commitment to enforce it.”
Mayor McCloud closed the meeting to public comment.
Attorney Jon Giffen addressed Carolyn Hardy’s concern about favoritism, “favoritism” not included in IV. TYPES OF HARASSMENT PROHIBITED and not contained in the draft policy.
Council Member Burnett expressed concern about City employees’ questions and Jon Giffen’s answers which stated “No further changes contemplated.”
Council Member Paula Hazdovac expressed concern about employee union question about person wrongfully accused of harassment and administrative leave.
City Attorney Don Freeman stated the City has a zero tolerance for harassment policy. Freeman advocated finalizing policy one time.
Council Member Talmage suggested that memo be responded to, to include draft policy to associations, unions and all at-will employees, and call for comments by date certain.
Council Member Hazdovac suggested employees’ responses by Friday, April 22.
Attorney Jon Giffen agreed to rewrite draft policy by April 26.
The City’s amended revised Harassment Prevention Policy will appear on the City Council’s 3 May 2011 Meeting.
Sunday, January 02, 2011
City Council Town Hall Meetings & Factors to Consider Regarding Paid Parking
UPDATE II: Fire Services - UPDATE
"The Council Workshop on fire services has been postponed by the City Administrator to give more time to work on the staff report," according to City Council Member Jason Burnett.
UPDATE I:
Tuesday, 18 January 2011 @ 4:30 P.M.: Fire Protection Service Options
Thursday, 27 January 2011 @ 5:00 P.M., City Hall Council Chambers: Paid-Parking Discussion
PARKING MANAGEMENT INFORMATION
Downtown Paid Parking Program
Notes: In an effort to improve parking, traffic and circulation the City is considering the development of a paid parking program in the downtown. Cities across the country have used paid parking as an effective management tool. Some of the benefits of paid parking include:
• An increase in the availability of conveninient downtown parking for visitors and residents
• Allow visitors and residents to stay as long as they wish without fear of receiving a parking citation
• An increase in City revenues that can be invested into the community
Comments and/or suggestions regarding paid parking may be submitted by email to paidparking@ci.carmel.ca.us
PUBLIC NOTICE
Downtown Paid Parking Program Workshop
Carmel Paid Parking Program Workshop
Public Workshop
27 January 2011
5:00 p.m.
Draft AGENDA:
1. Introductions/Overview 5 min
2. Staff Presentation 20 min
-Program Goals
-Program Approach
-Paid Parking Technology
-Employee & Resident Parking
3. Group Discussion 20 min
a. Free form discussion
_____________________________________________
Tuesday, 18 January 2011 (Time TBD): Fire Protection Service Options
Thursday, 27 January 2011 @ 4:30 P.M.: Paid-Parking Discussion
(Source: January Town Hall Meeting, Jason Burnett, December 28, 2010)
Factors to Consider Regarding Paid Parking in the Commercial District:
"The question of whether to implement or increase charges for on-street parking usually arises when demand exceeds supply (charging for parking when there isn't high demand is generally a bad idea - pricing should be used to manage the parking supply efficiently, not simply to raise revenue)."
Comment: Motiviaton for instituting paid parking should not be “simply to raise revenue,” but rather to manage parking.
"If there are free parking areas that are less convenient, some people may choose to park a bit farther away rather than pay for parking (see "shuttle service and offsite parking" on this page for more information). If there are nearby neighborhoods where on-street parking is unregulated, spillover parking may become more of an issue (for information on potential solutions to this issue, see addressing spillover)."
Comment: “Spillover parking” into the residential areas should be considered; is it advisable to post "No Parking” signs everywhere in the neighboring residential district?
"A large part of whether charging for parking will negatively impact businesses depends on how attractive the district is relative to other options. If there is a popular mall a short drive away providing many of the same goods and services with free parking, that can increase the likelihood that people will go elsewhere. On the other hand, if the downtown provides enough amenities and attractions - such as restaurants, bars, and appealing outdoor spaces - that cannot be replaced by a mall or isolated shopping center, the downtown is more likely to succeed."
"Parking rates that are wildly out-of-sync with the rates charged in similar locations in nearby communities can increase the risk that the cost of parking will encourage people to take their business elsewhere. This does not mean that rates must exactly match those of the surrounding communities, especially if those places have less demand for parking, but it is advisable to factor in the rate structures that drivers encounter in other similar places."
Comment: With free parking and many other equivalent shopping opportunities at the Barnyard and the Crossroads Shopping Center, for example, people may “go elsewhere.”
(Source: Charging for On-street and Public Parking, January 29, 2010)
"The Council Workshop on fire services has been postponed by the City Administrator to give more time to work on the staff report," according to City Council Member Jason Burnett.
UPDATE I:
Tuesday, 18 January 2011 @ 4:30 P.M.: Fire Protection Service Options
Thursday, 27 January 2011 @ 5:00 P.M., City Hall Council Chambers: Paid-Parking Discussion
PARKING MANAGEMENT INFORMATION
Downtown Paid Parking Program
Notes: In an effort to improve parking, traffic and circulation the City is considering the development of a paid parking program in the downtown. Cities across the country have used paid parking as an effective management tool. Some of the benefits of paid parking include:
• An increase in the availability of conveninient downtown parking for visitors and residents
• Allow visitors and residents to stay as long as they wish without fear of receiving a parking citation
• An increase in City revenues that can be invested into the community
Comments and/or suggestions regarding paid parking may be submitted by email to paidparking@ci.carmel.ca.us
PUBLIC NOTICE
Downtown Paid Parking Program Workshop
Carmel Paid Parking Program Workshop
Public Workshop
27 January 2011
5:00 p.m.
Draft AGENDA:
1. Introductions/Overview 5 min
2. Staff Presentation 20 min
-Program Goals
-Program Approach
-Paid Parking Technology
-Employee & Resident Parking
3. Group Discussion 20 min
a. Free form discussion
_____________________________________________
Tuesday, 18 January 2011 (Time TBD): Fire Protection Service Options
Thursday, 27 January 2011 @ 4:30 P.M.: Paid-Parking Discussion
(Source: January Town Hall Meeting, Jason Burnett, December 28, 2010)
Factors to Consider Regarding Paid Parking in the Commercial District:
"The question of whether to implement or increase charges for on-street parking usually arises when demand exceeds supply (charging for parking when there isn't high demand is generally a bad idea - pricing should be used to manage the parking supply efficiently, not simply to raise revenue)."
Comment: Motiviaton for instituting paid parking should not be “simply to raise revenue,” but rather to manage parking.
"If there are free parking areas that are less convenient, some people may choose to park a bit farther away rather than pay for parking (see "shuttle service and offsite parking" on this page for more information). If there are nearby neighborhoods where on-street parking is unregulated, spillover parking may become more of an issue (for information on potential solutions to this issue, see addressing spillover)."
Comment: “Spillover parking” into the residential areas should be considered; is it advisable to post "No Parking” signs everywhere in the neighboring residential district?
"A large part of whether charging for parking will negatively impact businesses depends on how attractive the district is relative to other options. If there is a popular mall a short drive away providing many of the same goods and services with free parking, that can increase the likelihood that people will go elsewhere. On the other hand, if the downtown provides enough amenities and attractions - such as restaurants, bars, and appealing outdoor spaces - that cannot be replaced by a mall or isolated shopping center, the downtown is more likely to succeed."
"Parking rates that are wildly out-of-sync with the rates charged in similar locations in nearby communities can increase the risk that the cost of parking will encourage people to take their business elsewhere. This does not mean that rates must exactly match those of the surrounding communities, especially if those places have less demand for parking, but it is advisable to factor in the rate structures that drivers encounter in other similar places."
Comment: With free parking and many other equivalent shopping opportunities at the Barnyard and the Crossroads Shopping Center, for example, people may “go elsewhere.”
(Source: Charging for On-street and Public Parking, January 29, 2010)
Sunday, December 05, 2010
Three Noteworthy 7 December 2010 City Council Agenda Items
ABSTRACT: Three Noteworthy 7 December 2010 City Council Agenda Items, namely Receive City’s Year-End and First Quarter 2010-2011 financial reports, Present FY 2009-10 Draft Audited Financial Statements by Ralph Marcello, Marcello & Company CPAs and Receive report and provide policy direction on extending the shared fire services agreement for 30 days, are presented. Excerpts from Agenda Item Summary, Staff Report, AGREEMENT TO PROVIDE INTERIM FIRE ADMINISTRATION AND EMERGENCY INCIDENT MANAGEMENT SERVICES BETWEEN THE CITIES OF MONTEREY AND CARMEL-BY-THE-SEA, Amendment to Agreement to Provide Limited Fire Services between the Cities of Monterey and Carmel-By-The-Sea and Amendment #2 to Agreement to Provide Interim Fire Administration and Emergency Incident Management Services between the Cities of Monterey and Carmel-By-The-Sea are provided.
AGENDA PACKET
Regular Meeting
Tuesday, December 7, 2010
4:30 p.m., Open Session
Live & Archived Video Streaming
City Hall
East side of Monte Verde Street between Ocean and Seventh Avenues
V. Announcements from Closed Session, from City Council Members and the City Administrator.
C. Announcements from City Administrator
1. Receive City’s Year-End and First Quarter 2010-2011 financial reports.
2. Present FY 2009-10 Draft Audited Financial Statements by Ralph Marcello, Marcello & Company CPAs.
XI. Orders of Council
A. Receive report and provide policy direction on extending the shared fire services agreement for 30 days.
Description: In December 2008, Council directed staff to review alternatives of providing fire services. Over the past several months, separate meetings were held with both CAL FIRE and Monterey/Pacific Grove fire departments to review all possible alternatives. There also was a period of time when all agencies were evaluating the creation of a Joint Powers Authority to provide Peninsula-wide shared fire services, however, this effort has encountered some difficulties, mostly related to risk management. Thus, staff’s efforts have refocused on developing a contractual relationship with an outside fire agency.
Staff has now formally requested a mutually agreeable, 30-day extension of the Monterey/Pacific Grove shared fire services agreement. It is recommended that the extension not go beyond January 31, 2011.
Overall Cost: The monthly payment for the current services provided by Monterey/Pacific Grove is $13,500 per month. This amount will remain the same during the 30-day contract extension period.
Staff Recommendation: Review the report and provide direction.
Important Considerations: Before the January 31, 2011 extension with Monterey/Pacific Grove ends, a comprehensive draft report will be presented at a Council workshop, the focus of which will be a review of various shared fire services alternatives. Staff will ask the Council some time before the end of January to decide which fire services alternative will best serve the City and to direct staff to prepare the appropriate agreements to implement that decision.
RECOMMENDATION
The agreement allows for an extension of the agreement by mutual consent of both parties. No City Council action is necessary at this time.
STAFF REVIEW
Staff has formally requested a 30-day extension on the Monterey/Pacific Grove shared fire services agreement. Staff is completing the draft report and accompanying PowerPoint presentation. It is recommended that the extension not go beyond January 31, 2011.
Prior to the end of this extension, a Council workshop will be held to review the various shared fire services alternatives. At some point before January 31st, staff will ask the Council to make a decision on which fire services alternative will best serve the City and thus, direct staff to prepare the appropriate agreements to implement that decision.
SUMMARY
A draft comprehensive report is being completed and will be presented at an upcoming Council workshop.
AGREEMENT TO PROVIDE INTERIM FIRE ADMINISTRATION AND EMERGENCY INCIDENT MANAGEMENT SERVICES BETWEEN THE CITIES OF MONTEREY AND CARMEL-BY-THE-SEA
THIS AGREEMENT, made and executed this day of December 3, 2008 by and between the CITY OF MONTEREY, a municipal corporation, herein after referred to as “Monterey,” and the CITY OF CARMEL-BY-THE-SEA, a municipal corporation, herein after referred to as “Carmel” (collectively referred to as “the Parties), ...
ARTICLE I
TERM OF AGREEMENT
1.1 Initial Term. The term of this Agreement shall be from 12:00 midnight on December 15, 2009 through 11:59 p.m. on February 28, 2009.
1.2 Extension of Term. This Agreement may be extended by mutual agreement of the Parties conditioned upon joint commitment and good faith effort to develop and execute a successor agreement for full fire department services.
ARTICLE III
DUTIES OF CARMEL UNDER THIS AGREEMENT
3.1 Payment for Fire Services. Carmel agrees to compensate Monterey for all services provided pursuant to the terms and conditions of this Agreement as follows:
(a) $11,250.00 per calendar month, prorated at $375.00 per day, or any portion of a day, for services provided during any partial calendar month.
ADOPTED BY:
CITY OF CARMEL-BY-THE-SEA, A Municipal Corporation
By: Rich Guillen, City Administrator
Date: 12/31/08
CITY OF MONTEREY, A Municipal Corporation
By: Fred Meurer, City Manager
Date: 1/20/09
Amendment to Agreement to Provide Limited Fire Services between the Cities of Monterey and Carmel-By-The-Sea
ARTICLE I
TERM OF AGREEMENT
1.2 Extension of Term. The term of this Agreement is hereby amended to expire at 12:00 midnight on January 31, 2010.
ARTICLE III
DUTIES OF CARMEL UNDER THIS AGREEMENT
3.1 Payment for Fire Services. Carmel agrees to compensate Monterey for all services provided pursuant to the terms and conditions of this Agreement as follows:
(a) Effective July 1, 2009, $13,500.00 per calendar month, prorated at $450.00 per day or any portion of a day, for services provided during any partial calendar month.
ADOPTED BY:
CITY OF CARMEL-BY-THE-SEA, A Municipal Corporation
By: Rich Guillen, City Administrator
Date: 7-8-09
CITY OF MONTEREY, A Municipal Corporation
By: Fred Meurer, City Manager
Date: 7/26/09
Amendment #2 to Agreement to Provide Interim Fire Administration and Emergency Incident Management Services between the Cities of Monterey and Carmel-By-The-Sea
ARTICLE I
TERM OR AGREEMENT
1.2 Extension of Term. The term of this Agreement is hereby amended to expire at 12:00 midnight on December 31, 2010. The term of this Agreement may be further extended by mutual agreement of the Parties conditioned upon joint commitment and good faith effort to develop and execute a successor agreement for full fire department services.
All other remaining terms and conditions of the Agreement not specifically amended herein shall remain unchanged.
ADOPTED BY:
CITY OF CARMEL-BY-THE-SEA. A Municipal Corporation
By: Rich Guillen, City Administrator
Date: 1-25-10
CITY OF MONTEREY, A Municipal Corporation
By: Fred Meurer, City Manager
Date: 2-2-10
AGENDA PACKET
Regular Meeting
Tuesday, December 7, 2010
4:30 p.m., Open Session
Live & Archived Video Streaming
City Hall
East side of Monte Verde Street between Ocean and Seventh Avenues
V. Announcements from Closed Session, from City Council Members and the City Administrator.
C. Announcements from City Administrator
1. Receive City’s Year-End and First Quarter 2010-2011 financial reports.
2. Present FY 2009-10 Draft Audited Financial Statements by Ralph Marcello, Marcello & Company CPAs.
XI. Orders of Council
A. Receive report and provide policy direction on extending the shared fire services agreement for 30 days.
Description: In December 2008, Council directed staff to review alternatives of providing fire services. Over the past several months, separate meetings were held with both CAL FIRE and Monterey/Pacific Grove fire departments to review all possible alternatives. There also was a period of time when all agencies were evaluating the creation of a Joint Powers Authority to provide Peninsula-wide shared fire services, however, this effort has encountered some difficulties, mostly related to risk management. Thus, staff’s efforts have refocused on developing a contractual relationship with an outside fire agency.
Staff has now formally requested a mutually agreeable, 30-day extension of the Monterey/Pacific Grove shared fire services agreement. It is recommended that the extension not go beyond January 31, 2011.
Overall Cost: The monthly payment for the current services provided by Monterey/Pacific Grove is $13,500 per month. This amount will remain the same during the 30-day contract extension period.
Staff Recommendation: Review the report and provide direction.
Important Considerations: Before the January 31, 2011 extension with Monterey/Pacific Grove ends, a comprehensive draft report will be presented at a Council workshop, the focus of which will be a review of various shared fire services alternatives. Staff will ask the Council some time before the end of January to decide which fire services alternative will best serve the City and to direct staff to prepare the appropriate agreements to implement that decision.
RECOMMENDATION
The agreement allows for an extension of the agreement by mutual consent of both parties. No City Council action is necessary at this time.
STAFF REVIEW
Staff has formally requested a 30-day extension on the Monterey/Pacific Grove shared fire services agreement. Staff is completing the draft report and accompanying PowerPoint presentation. It is recommended that the extension not go beyond January 31, 2011.
Prior to the end of this extension, a Council workshop will be held to review the various shared fire services alternatives. At some point before January 31st, staff will ask the Council to make a decision on which fire services alternative will best serve the City and thus, direct staff to prepare the appropriate agreements to implement that decision.
SUMMARY
A draft comprehensive report is being completed and will be presented at an upcoming Council workshop.
AGREEMENT TO PROVIDE INTERIM FIRE ADMINISTRATION AND EMERGENCY INCIDENT MANAGEMENT SERVICES BETWEEN THE CITIES OF MONTEREY AND CARMEL-BY-THE-SEA
THIS AGREEMENT, made and executed this day of December 3, 2008 by and between the CITY OF MONTEREY, a municipal corporation, herein after referred to as “Monterey,” and the CITY OF CARMEL-BY-THE-SEA, a municipal corporation, herein after referred to as “Carmel” (collectively referred to as “the Parties), ...
ARTICLE I
TERM OF AGREEMENT
1.1 Initial Term. The term of this Agreement shall be from 12:00 midnight on December 15, 2009 through 11:59 p.m. on February 28, 2009.
1.2 Extension of Term. This Agreement may be extended by mutual agreement of the Parties conditioned upon joint commitment and good faith effort to develop and execute a successor agreement for full fire department services.
ARTICLE III
DUTIES OF CARMEL UNDER THIS AGREEMENT
3.1 Payment for Fire Services. Carmel agrees to compensate Monterey for all services provided pursuant to the terms and conditions of this Agreement as follows:
(a) $11,250.00 per calendar month, prorated at $375.00 per day, or any portion of a day, for services provided during any partial calendar month.
ADOPTED BY:
CITY OF CARMEL-BY-THE-SEA, A Municipal Corporation
By: Rich Guillen, City Administrator
Date: 12/31/08
CITY OF MONTEREY, A Municipal Corporation
By: Fred Meurer, City Manager
Date: 1/20/09
Amendment to Agreement to Provide Limited Fire Services between the Cities of Monterey and Carmel-By-The-Sea
ARTICLE I
TERM OF AGREEMENT
1.2 Extension of Term. The term of this Agreement is hereby amended to expire at 12:00 midnight on January 31, 2010.
ARTICLE III
DUTIES OF CARMEL UNDER THIS AGREEMENT
3.1 Payment for Fire Services. Carmel agrees to compensate Monterey for all services provided pursuant to the terms and conditions of this Agreement as follows:
(a) Effective July 1, 2009, $13,500.00 per calendar month, prorated at $450.00 per day or any portion of a day, for services provided during any partial calendar month.
ADOPTED BY:
CITY OF CARMEL-BY-THE-SEA, A Municipal Corporation
By: Rich Guillen, City Administrator
Date: 7-8-09
CITY OF MONTEREY, A Municipal Corporation
By: Fred Meurer, City Manager
Date: 7/26/09
Amendment #2 to Agreement to Provide Interim Fire Administration and Emergency Incident Management Services between the Cities of Monterey and Carmel-By-The-Sea
ARTICLE I
TERM OR AGREEMENT
1.2 Extension of Term. The term of this Agreement is hereby amended to expire at 12:00 midnight on December 31, 2010. The term of this Agreement may be further extended by mutual agreement of the Parties conditioned upon joint commitment and good faith effort to develop and execute a successor agreement for full fire department services.
All other remaining terms and conditions of the Agreement not specifically amended herein shall remain unchanged.
ADOPTED BY:
CITY OF CARMEL-BY-THE-SEA. A Municipal Corporation
By: Rich Guillen, City Administrator
Date: 1-25-10
CITY OF MONTEREY, A Municipal Corporation
By: Fred Meurer, City Manager
Date: 2-2-10
Wednesday, October 27, 2010
FIRE PROTECTION SERVICES
ABSTRACT: In the context of the City’s Interim Fire Protection Services Agreement with the City of Monterey expiring 31 December 2010, background information and links to resources are provided, including the CITYGATE ASSOCIATES, LLC Fire Department Consolidation Feasibility Analysis for the Cities of Monterey, Pacific Grove and Carmel, Final Report, June 12, 2007, a “high-level assessment of the feasibility of fire agency consolidation for the cities of Monterey, Pacific Grove and Carmel.”
Citygate Associates feasibilitystudy
CITYGATE ASSOCIATES, LLC
Fire Department Consolidation Feasibility Analysis for the Cities of Monterey, Pacific Grove and Carmel Final Report
June 12, 2007
ADDENDUM:
Dousing the Flames
Peninsula city managers make the case for a fire merger.
By Ray Corpuz, MONTEREY COUNTY WEEKLY, SEPTEMBER 30, 2010
Monterey Peninsula cities eye merged fire district: Peninsula: JPA's first move would be to name single chief [The Monterey County Herald, Calif.], May 30, 2010
City of Monterey Fire Department
Fire Chief Sam L. Mazza
Email: mazza@ci.monterey.ca.us
Monterey Firefighters
Fire Merger Video
Duration: 4:48
Monterey, Pacific Grove Fire Merger Becomes Official, October 8, 2008
Duration: 2:56
City of Seaside Fire Department
Fire JPA Information Site
Seaside Fire Association
A message from your Seaside Fire Fighters regarding the proposed merger of area fire services
Seaside Firefighters Questions and Answers
Merger News
(Sources of News: KCBA & The Monterey County Herald)
Memorandum of Understanding Between the City of Seaside and the Seaside Firefighters’ Association
July 1, 2010 - June 30, 2012
California Department of Forestry and Fire Protection (CAL FIRE)
Fire Protection
What is CAL FIRE?
CAL FIRE
Fire and Emergency Response
Local Government
What You Need to Know About Regionalizing Public Safety Responsibilities
BY J. SCOTT TIEDEMANN, JACK HUGHES AND TODD SIMONSON, Western City, THE MONTHLY MAGAZINE OF THE LEAGUE OF CALIFORNIA CITIES, OCTOBER 2010
Citygate Associates feasibilitystudy
CITYGATE ASSOCIATES, LLC
Fire Department Consolidation Feasibility Analysis for the Cities of Monterey, Pacific Grove and Carmel Final Report
June 12, 2007
ADDENDUM:
Dousing the Flames
Peninsula city managers make the case for a fire merger.
By Ray Corpuz, MONTEREY COUNTY WEEKLY, SEPTEMBER 30, 2010
Monterey Peninsula cities eye merged fire district: Peninsula: JPA's first move would be to name single chief [The Monterey County Herald, Calif.], May 30, 2010
City of Monterey Fire Department
Fire Chief Sam L. Mazza
Email: mazza@ci.monterey.ca.us
Monterey Firefighters
Fire Merger Video
Duration: 4:48
Monterey, Pacific Grove Fire Merger Becomes Official, October 8, 2008
Duration: 2:56
City of Seaside Fire Department
Fire JPA Information Site
Seaside Fire Association
A message from your Seaside Fire Fighters regarding the proposed merger of area fire services
Seaside Firefighters Questions and Answers
Merger News
(Sources of News: KCBA & The Monterey County Herald)
Memorandum of Understanding Between the City of Seaside and the Seaside Firefighters’ Association
July 1, 2010 - June 30, 2012
California Department of Forestry and Fire Protection (CAL FIRE)
Fire Protection
What is CAL FIRE?
CAL FIRE
Fire and Emergency Response
Local Government
What You Need to Know About Regionalizing Public Safety Responsibilities
BY J. SCOTT TIEDEMANN, JACK HUGHES AND TODD SIMONSON, Western City, THE MONTHLY MAGAZINE OF THE LEAGUE OF CALIFORNIA CITIES, OCTOBER 2010
Friday, May 21, 2010
CRITICAL PUBLIC SAFETY ISSUE: Regional Joint Powers Authority Agreement for Fire Services
ABSTRACT: For the City of Monterey’s 26 May 2010 City Council Meeting, City of Monterey Fire Chief Sam Mazza prepared a report on the subject “Authorizing and Directing Participation in the Development of a Regional Joint Powers Authority Agreement for Fire Services.” HIGHLIGHTS of the report, the complete verbatim report, HIGHLIGHTS of the City of Pacific Grove City Manager Thomas Frutchey’s Agenda Item report “Selection of Preferred Option for Future Fire Services” and HIGHLIGHTS of the City of Seaside Fire Chief Jerry Wombacher's Staff Report "PARTICIPATION IN THE REGIONAL FIRE SERVICES JOINT POWERS AUTHORITY" are presented. A Preliminary Draft JPA Agreement is reproduced in a preceding post. Background: Since December 2009, a JPA Working Group consisting of management staff of the six “core” cities, namely Monterey, Seaside, Pacific Grove, Carmel-by-the-Sea, Sand City, and Del Rey Oaks, “has identified a Joint Powers Authority agreement as a viable and the preferred alternative to achieve the desired fiscal and operational efficiencies. This group has also initiated development of the framework of a JPA governance agreement. In addition, a JPA Executive Committee consisting of the City Managers of the “core” cities has endorsed the Working Group’s recommendations relative to this preferred solution and key points of the draft governance agreement.” On May 12, 2010, the Pacific Grove City Council unanimously authorized participation in the development of the proposed JPA agreement, and the Seaside City Council postponed action on May 20 until their next meeting in June 2010. Additionally, the Monterey Fire Fighters Association, Monterey Fire Management Association, Seaside Public Safety Management Association, and Carmel Professional Firefighters Association all endorse the regional fire JPA proposal, according to Fire Chief Sam Mazza.
HIGHLIGHTS of “Authorizing and Directing Participation in the Development of a Regional Joint Powers Authority Agreement for Fire Services,” by City of Monterey Fire Chief Sam Mazza:
To: City Manager
From: Fire Chief
Date: May 26, 2010
Subject: Authorizing and Directing Participation in the Development of a Regional Joint Powers Authority Agreement for Fire Services
...the 2007 fire service consolidation study by the cities of Monterey, Pacific Grove, and Carmel-by-the-Sea both concluded that consolidation of fire services among the cities would provide enhanced fiscal and operational efficiencies and effectiveness. Both studies recommended a Joint Powers Authority (JPA) as the best-fit governance model, and further recommended merging the existing fire management staffs to provide the capacity to conduct the longer range detailed analysis and planning necessary to achieve full consolidation.
In October 2009, the Monterey County Mayors Association tasked the City Managers to explore opportunities to achieve enhanced fiscal and operational efficiencies by sharing fire services. This led to a November 2009 meeting of Monterey Peninsula City Managers and other fire agency policy-level and executive-level leaders to further discuss conceptual approaches to achieving the Mayors’ Association goal. These discussions highlighted the current window of opportunity to achieve fiscal and operational efficiencies by improving organizational efficiencies in the multiple small fire agencies within the greater Monterey Peninsula region. The discussions resulted in general consensus that the concept of a joint sub-regional fire agency had sufficient merit to warrant further discussion and analysis, and a “core” group of six cities including Monterey, Seaside, Pacific Grove, Carmel-by-the-Sea, Sand City, and Del Rey Oaks was formed to further develop a solution that could be implemented relatively quickly yet be scaled to accommodate future partner jurisdictions.
Since then, a JPA Working Group consisting of management staff of the six “core” cities has identified a Joint Powers Authority agreement as a viable and the preferred alternative to achieve the desired fiscal and operational efficiencies. This group has also initiated development of the framework of a JPA governance agreement. In addition, a JPA Executive Committee consisting of the City Managers of the “core” cities has endorsed the Working Group’s recommendations relative to this preferred solution and key points of the draft governance agreement.
Current Proposal
A Joint Powers Authority (JPA) is a public entity created by agreement of two or more public agencies pursuant to Division 7, Chapter 5, Article 1, Sections 6500 et seq. of the California Government Code. Essentially, a JPA has powers and responsibilities similar to other public agencies, limited by the terms of the governing agreement. Each member agency appoints representatives to the JPA Board of Directors, which makes policy-level decisions governing the Authority.
The approach being considered for this Fire JPA would provide member agencies equal membership on the JPA Board of Directors. All agencies would continue to own their respective fire station facilities and equipment. Cost and operational advantages would accrue through economies of scale, particularly with consolidated headquarters staffing. Instead of operating as several independent fire departments, the envisioned JPA would operate as one unified department, with one Fire Chief and management staff scaled to manage the stations and personnel within the regional system.
The proposed JPA would be effective July 1, 2010 or as soon as possible thereafter, and would begin demonstrating operational and cost efficiencies immediately. However, due to significant administrative and labor relations matters that take considerable time to resolve (e.g., development of a CalPERS contract for a new agency can take one year or more before approval), the JPA is proposed to be implemented in three phases over approximately two years as follows:
Phase 1: Fire Chief Services (targeted effective July 1, 2010)
• JPA Board of Directors formed; initial members are agencies with fire resources: Seaside, Carmel-by-the-Sea, Monterey, and Pacific Grove
• Del Rey Oaks and Sand City will continue existing contractual relationships with Seaside and Monterey respectively during Phase 1
• JPA employs Fire Chief with the costs to be shared among all agencies using agreed cost sharing formula
• Member agencies appoint JPA Fire Chief as agency’s Fire Chief, with all authority to direct staff
• JPA Fire Chief would implement procedures to effect functional integration of member agencies’ fire services as soon as possible, including standardized training and operational procedures to achieve a single, fully integrated system.
• Member agencies continue to employ their existing command staff and fire station personnel
Phase 2: Fire Headquarters Services (targeted effective July 1, 2011)
• Fire command and administrative positions to be employed by the JPA with the costs to be shared among all agencies using the agreed cost sharing formula
Phase 3: Fire Station Services: (targeted effective July 1, 2012)
• All operational fire station personnel employed by the JPA
If the Council commits to the JPA, implementation will occur gradually over the next two years. In FY 2010-11, the City would pay its share for Fire Chief Services to the JPA, and would pay for all other services through the current budget process. Under the cost sharing formula and assuming all of the initial cities join the JPA, Monterey’s share of Fire Chief Services in phase 1 is 46.12%, or approximately $105,000. The costs for FY 2011-12 would reflect the cost of the shared headquarters services at approximately the same cost sharing percentage. The plan assumes the shared JPA costs for FY 2012-13 and beyond would utilize the same formula with Monterey’s share approximately 46%. After implementation of Phase 3, all staffing costs would be paid through the JPA.
COMPLETE VERBATIM REPORT "Authorizing and Directing Participation in the Development of a Regional Joint Powers Authority Agreement for Fire Services," by City of Monterey Fire Chief Sam Mazza:
CITY OF MONTEREY
To: City Manager
From: Fire Chief
Date: May 26, 2010
Subject: Authorizing and Directing Participation in the Development of a Regional Joint Powers Authority Agreement for Fire Services
Recommendation:
That the City Council authorize and direct staff to:
1. Continue development of a Joint Powers Authority (JPA) Agreement for fire services with the cities of Pacific Grove, Seaside, and Carmel-by-the-Sea; and
2. Present a final JPA agreement for approval by the City Council as soon as practical for implementation on or shortly after July 1, 2010.
Policy Implications:
The recommended action is consistent with the City Council’s strategic initiative to continue to seek and develop collaborative solutions with other local agencies and jurisdictions to enhance service levels, operational efficiency, and cost-effectiveness of fire and EMS services.
Fiscal Implications:
As proposed, the JPA would be implemented in three phases over approximately two years as described in the Discussion section of this report. The JPA would yield significant cost savings to the City for fire services, estimated to be $70,000 for Phase 1 and $340,000 annually for Phase 2 and thereafter. These savings would be reduced if any of the four “core” cities (Monterey, Seaside, Pacific Grove, and Carmel) should elect not to participate in the JPA.
Council should also be aware that Monterey has agreed to modify the fiscal model for existing contract fire services to Pacific Grove during the first phase to reflect incremental costs in lieu of the current proportional share methodology. That contract authorizes the City Managers of Monterey and Pacific Grove to revise the fiscal model by mutual written agreement, and this modification was offered to make the fiscal analysis more comparable between the proposed JPA alternative and a CalFIRE proposal that was also being considered by Pacific Grove. Under this revised fiscal methodology, Pacific Grove and Carmel will pay the incremental costs of the two former Pacific Grove chief officers for phase one. Pacific Grove will also continue to pay the direct personnel costs to staff the Pacific Grove station.
In phase two, all the participating cities will pay their proportionate share of all headquarters costs, and Pacific Grove will continue to pay the direct personnel costs associated with the Pacific Grove station. In phase three, all partner agencies will pay their proportionate share of headquarters costs and all direct costs associated with the staffing and operation of their respective fire stations.
Alternatives Considered:
No alternatives are suggested. Council could elect not to approve the proposed Resolution; however such action would result in higher costs for stand-alone fire services and would not be consistent with previous Council policy direction.
Discussion:
Background
The City of Monterey has participated with other local jurisdictions in shared services partnerships for many years, including the Fort Ord Reuse Authority (FORA), Transportation Agency of Monterey County (TAMC), Monterey Regional Water Pollution Control Agency (MRWPCA), Monterey-Salinas Transit Authority (MST), and the Presidio Municipal Services Agency (PMSA).
Specific to fire services, Monterey currently provides full or partial contract services to the Department of Defense, La Mesa Village, Sand City, Pacific Grove, and Carmel-by-the-Sea. Other local studies and examples of shared fire services include:
1981 LAFCO study of Monterey Peninsula fire services recommends consolidation of Monterey and Monterey Airport fire services
1993 Monterey invites other Peninsula cities to develop fire services Joint Powers Authority (JPA)
2000 Consolidation of Carmel Valley and Mid Carmel Valley Fire Districts
2004 Cities of Seaside and Marina conduct fire consolidation study; proposed consolidation fails to gain approval of Marina City Council
2007 Fire consolidation study conducted by the cities of Monterey, Pacific Grove, and Carmel-by-the-Sea recommends full consolidation using JPA governance model
2008 Symposium of Monterey County fire agency policy and executive-level leaders held to discuss opportunities for fire service partnerships in light of current state and local economic crisis as a window of opportunity to identify common interests and explore common sense alternatives to reduce costs and maintain vital public safety services to our respective communities
2008 Monterey and Pacific Grove consolidate fire personnel; Pacific Grove contracts with Monterey for full fire services
2009 Seaside fire department management and staffing study recommends continuing to expand its efforts with the City of Monterey including discussions regarding the feasibility of forming a sub-regional partnership to provide fire protection and EMS services
The 2004 Seaside-Marina fire service consolidation study and the 2007 fire service consolidation study by the cities of Monterey, Pacific Grove, and Carmel-by-the-Sea both concluded that consolidation of fire services among the cities would provide enhanced fiscal and operational efficiencies and effectiveness. Both studies recommended a Joint Powers Authority (JPA) as the best-fit governance model, and further recommended merging the existing fire management staffs to provide the capacity to conduct the longer range detailed analysis and planning necessary to achieve full consolidation.
In October 2009, the Monterey County Mayors Association tasked the City Managers to explore opportunities to achieve enhanced fiscal and operational efficiencies by sharing fire services. This led to a November 2009 meeting of Monterey Peninsula City Managers and other fire agency policy-level and executive-level leaders to further discuss conceptual approaches to achieving the Mayors’ Association goal. These discussions highlighted the current window of opportunity to achieve fiscal and operational efficiencies by improving organizational efficiencies in the multiple small fire agencies within the greater Monterey Peninsula region. The discussions resulted in general consensus that the concept of a joint sub-regional fire agency had sufficient merit to warrant further discussion and analysis, and a “core” group of six cities including Monterey, Seaside, Pacific Grove, Carmel, Sand City, and Del Rey Oaks was formed to further develop a solution that could be implemented relatively quickly yet be scaled to accommodate future partner jurisdictions. The objectives of this working group were to work cooperatively to:
• Identify and frame the key issues
• Define the scope and scale of a joint fire services agency
• Identify and explore shared governance options and associated costs
• Develop guiding principles
Council authorized participation in this initial study and analysis of joint sub-regional fire service options in December 2009. Participation did not commit the City to any proposed outcome, but rather provided the authority to participate in the working group’s analysis necessary to determine whether any of the potential joint services options could benefit Monterey and provide a higher level of service to the entire region by better utilizing existing resources.
Since then, a JPA Working Group consisting of management staff of the six “core” cities has identified a Joint Powers Authority agreement as a viable and the preferred alternative to achieve the desired fiscal and operational efficiencies. This group has also initiated development of the framework of a JPA governance agreement. In addition, a JPA Executive Committee consisting of the City Managers of the “core” cities has endorsed the Working Group’s recommendations relative to this preferred solution and key points of the draft governance agreement.
Current Proposal
A Joint Powers Authority (JPA) is a public entity created by agreement of two or more public agencies pursuant to Division 7, Chapter 5, Article 1, Sections 6500 et seq. of the California Government Code. Essentially, a JPA has powers and responsibilities similar to other public agencies, limited by the terms of the governing agreement. Each member agency appoints representatives to the JPA Board of Directors, which makes policy-level decisions governing the Authority.
The approach being considered for this Fire JPA would provide member agencies equal membership on the JPA Board of Directors. All agencies would continue to own their respective fire station facilities and equipment. Cost and operational advantages would accrue through economies of scale, particularly with consolidated headquarters staffing. Instead of operating as several independent fire departments, the envisioned JPA would operate as one unified department, with one Fire Chief and management staff scaled to manage the stations and personnel within the regional system.
Another key consideration regarding the JPA is its potential for fostering future cost-efficiency improvements through other forms of shared services. When successful, the JPA agreement could serve as a model for other regional services, such as police and public works.
The proposed JPA would be effective July 1, 2010 or as soon as possible thereafter, and would begin demonstrating operational and cost efficiencies immediately. However, due to significant administrative and labor relations matters that take considerable time to resolve (e.g., development of a CalPERS contract for a new agency can take one year or more before approval), the JPA is proposed to be implemented in three phases over approximately two years as follows:
Phase 1: Fire Chief Services (targeted effective July 1, 2010)
• JPA Board of Directors formed; initial members are agencies with fire resources: Seaside, Carmel-by-the-Sea, Monterey, and Pacific Grove
• Del Rey Oaks and Sand City will continue existing contractual relationships with Seaside and Monterey respectively during Phase 1
• JPA employs Fire Chief with the costs to be shared among all agencies using agreed cost sharing formula
• Member agencies appoint JPA Fire Chief as agency’s Fire Chief, with all authority to direct staff
• JPA Fire Chief would implement procedures to effect functional integration of member agencies’ fire services as soon as possible, including standardized training and operational procedures to achieve a single, fully integrated system.
• Member agencies continue to employ their existing command staff and fire station personnel
Phase 2: Fire Headquarters Services (targeted effective July 1, 2011)
• Fire command and administrative positions to be employed by the JPA with the costs to be shared among all agencies using the agreed cost sharing formula
Phase 3: Fire Station Services: (targeted effective July 1, 2012)
• All operational fire station personnel employed by the JPA
If the Council commits to the JPA, implementation will occur gradually over the next two years. In FY 2010-11, the City would pay its share for Fire Chief Services to the JPA, and would pay for all other services through the current budget process. Under the cost sharing formula and assuming all of the initial cities join the JPA, Monterey’s share of Fire Chief Services in phase 1 is 46.12%, or approximately $105,000. The costs for FY 2011-12 would reflect the cost of the shared headquarters services at approximately the same cost sharing percentage. The plan assumes the shared JPA costs for FY 2012-13 and beyond would utilize the same formula with Monterey’s share approximately 46%. After implementation of Phase 3, all staffing costs would be paid through the JPA.
At their May 12, 2010 meeting, the Pacific Grove City Council unanimously authorized participation in the development of the proposed JPA agreement, and the Seaside City Council will consider similar action on May 20. In addition, the Monterey Fire Fighters Association, Monterey Fire Management Association, Seaside Public Safety Management Association, and Carmel Professional Firefighters Association all endorse the regional fire JPA proposal.
HIGHLIGHTS of the City of Pacific Grove City Manager Thomas Frutchey’s Agenda Report “Selection of Preferred Option for Future Fire Services:”
CITY OF PACIFIC GROVE
300 Forest Avenue, Pacific Grove, California 93950
AGENDA REPORT
May 5, 2010
SUBJECT: Selection of Preferred Option for Future Fire Services
RECOMMENDATION
Direct staff to:
1. Continue working with Carmel-by-the-Sea, Monterey, Seaside and other jurisdictions on the peninsula to fully develop a Joint Powers Authority for fire services; and
2. Present a finalized agreement for approval at either the June 2 or June 16 City Council meeting to implement the first phase of the JPA, effective July 1, 2010.
Conclusion. As outlined above, both CAL FIRE and a Monterey Peninsula JPA could provide high-quality fire services for the City of Pacific Grove. On balance, however, the JPA option (Scenario #4, above) is clearly preferable, for 5 primary reasons:
• Shared governance and local control;
• The $0.6M lower cost for next fiscal year and the comparable average annual cost over the first five years;
• The potential for evolving services and reducing costs (including a two-tiered retirement system) over time;
• The potential for expanding the JPA into additional service areas; and
• If the JPA doesn’t work, we then would have several options, including transitioning into a contract with CAL FIRE. However, if we were to go with CAL FIRE and were not satisfied, there is no easy way to transition to another approach.
Staff believes that this JPA represents an opportunity that may not arise again for many years to create a new model for collaborative service delivery that could be adapted for other City services and serve as a powerful tool for achieving long-term financial sustainability for Pacific Grove.
Thomas Frutchey
City Manager
CITY OF SEASIDE REGULAR MEETING
CITY COUNCIL AGENDA 440 Harcourt Avenue, Seaside
Thursday, May 20, 2010
7:00 p.m.
A G E N D A
BUSINESS ITEMS
16. Participation in the Regional Fire Services Joint Powers Authority
PURPOSE: Receive an update on the formation of the Regional Fire Services Joint Powers Authority and to consider membership in the Authority.
RECOMMENDATION: It is recommended that the City Council:
1. Receive and accept a report on the Regional Fire Services Joint Powers Authority;
2. Approve membership in the Regional Fire Services Joint Powers Authority and authorize staff to continue working with Carmel-by-the-Sea, Monterey, Pacific Grove and other jurisdictions on the Peninsula to fully develop a Joint Powers Authority for fire services;
3. Authorize the Mayor to sign the final agreement for the Regional Fire Services Joint Powers Authority for implementation of the first phase of the JPA, effective July 1, 2010.
ITEM NO. 16
CITY OF SEASIDE
STAFF REPORT
TO: Honorable Mayor and City Council
FROM: Ray Corpuz, City Manager
BY: Jerry Wombacher, Fire Chief
Daphne Hodgson, Deputy City Manager – Administrative Services
DATE: May 20, 2010
SUBJECT: PARTICIPATION IN THE REGIONAL FIRE SERVICES JOINT POWERS AUTHORITY
PURPOSE
The purpose of this item is to give the City Council an opportunity to receive an update on the formation of the Regional Fire Services Joint Powers Authority and to consider membership in the Authority.
RECOMMENDATION
It is recommended that the City Council:
1. Receive and accept a report on the Regional Fire Services Joint Powers Authority;
2. Approve membership in the Regional Fire Services Joint Powers Authority and authorize staff to continue working with Carmel-by-the-Sea, Monterey, Pacific Grove and other jurisdictions on the Peninsula to fully develop a Joint Powers Authority for fire services;
3. Authorize the Mayor to sign the final agreement for the Regional Fire Services Joint Powers Authority for implementation of the first phase of the JPA, effective July 1, 2010.
BENEFITS OF A JPA
The JPA option would optimize local control for fire services, and establish the City’s governance authority, albeit in a shared fashion, with other member agencies. The approach being considered would provide member agencies equal membership on the JPA Board. All agencies would continue to own their respective fire station facilities and equipment. Cost and operational advantages would accrue through economies of scale, especially in consolidated headquarters staffing. Instead of operating as several independent fire departments, the envisioned JPA would operate as one unified department, with one Fire Chief and a management staff scaled to only the minimum number of management staff required to manage the stations in the system.
The advantages of local control are especially compelling now, as cities and the State struggle with the anticipated spiking of employee retirement costs in the coming years. The Monterey County Mayors also tasked the city managers with tackling the retirement cost problem in a collaborative way and to affect needed changes without creating recruitment competitiveness disparities. So far, the city managers have all committed to pursuing second-tier benefit plans for future JPA employees, which would save significant money in the future. In addition, the city managers of the prospective JPA member cities have reiterated the vital importance of this change and acknowledge the opportunity for controlling these costs at the local level.
HIGHLIGHTS of “Authorizing and Directing Participation in the Development of a Regional Joint Powers Authority Agreement for Fire Services,” by City of Monterey Fire Chief Sam Mazza:
To: City Manager
From: Fire Chief
Date: May 26, 2010
Subject: Authorizing and Directing Participation in the Development of a Regional Joint Powers Authority Agreement for Fire Services
...the 2007 fire service consolidation study by the cities of Monterey, Pacific Grove, and Carmel-by-the-Sea both concluded that consolidation of fire services among the cities would provide enhanced fiscal and operational efficiencies and effectiveness. Both studies recommended a Joint Powers Authority (JPA) as the best-fit governance model, and further recommended merging the existing fire management staffs to provide the capacity to conduct the longer range detailed analysis and planning necessary to achieve full consolidation.
In October 2009, the Monterey County Mayors Association tasked the City Managers to explore opportunities to achieve enhanced fiscal and operational efficiencies by sharing fire services. This led to a November 2009 meeting of Monterey Peninsula City Managers and other fire agency policy-level and executive-level leaders to further discuss conceptual approaches to achieving the Mayors’ Association goal. These discussions highlighted the current window of opportunity to achieve fiscal and operational efficiencies by improving organizational efficiencies in the multiple small fire agencies within the greater Monterey Peninsula region. The discussions resulted in general consensus that the concept of a joint sub-regional fire agency had sufficient merit to warrant further discussion and analysis, and a “core” group of six cities including Monterey, Seaside, Pacific Grove, Carmel-by-the-Sea, Sand City, and Del Rey Oaks was formed to further develop a solution that could be implemented relatively quickly yet be scaled to accommodate future partner jurisdictions.
Since then, a JPA Working Group consisting of management staff of the six “core” cities has identified a Joint Powers Authority agreement as a viable and the preferred alternative to achieve the desired fiscal and operational efficiencies. This group has also initiated development of the framework of a JPA governance agreement. In addition, a JPA Executive Committee consisting of the City Managers of the “core” cities has endorsed the Working Group’s recommendations relative to this preferred solution and key points of the draft governance agreement.
Current Proposal
A Joint Powers Authority (JPA) is a public entity created by agreement of two or more public agencies pursuant to Division 7, Chapter 5, Article 1, Sections 6500 et seq. of the California Government Code. Essentially, a JPA has powers and responsibilities similar to other public agencies, limited by the terms of the governing agreement. Each member agency appoints representatives to the JPA Board of Directors, which makes policy-level decisions governing the Authority.
The approach being considered for this Fire JPA would provide member agencies equal membership on the JPA Board of Directors. All agencies would continue to own their respective fire station facilities and equipment. Cost and operational advantages would accrue through economies of scale, particularly with consolidated headquarters staffing. Instead of operating as several independent fire departments, the envisioned JPA would operate as one unified department, with one Fire Chief and management staff scaled to manage the stations and personnel within the regional system.
The proposed JPA would be effective July 1, 2010 or as soon as possible thereafter, and would begin demonstrating operational and cost efficiencies immediately. However, due to significant administrative and labor relations matters that take considerable time to resolve (e.g., development of a CalPERS contract for a new agency can take one year or more before approval), the JPA is proposed to be implemented in three phases over approximately two years as follows:
Phase 1: Fire Chief Services (targeted effective July 1, 2010)
• JPA Board of Directors formed; initial members are agencies with fire resources: Seaside, Carmel-by-the-Sea, Monterey, and Pacific Grove
• Del Rey Oaks and Sand City will continue existing contractual relationships with Seaside and Monterey respectively during Phase 1
• JPA employs Fire Chief with the costs to be shared among all agencies using agreed cost sharing formula
• Member agencies appoint JPA Fire Chief as agency’s Fire Chief, with all authority to direct staff
• JPA Fire Chief would implement procedures to effect functional integration of member agencies’ fire services as soon as possible, including standardized training and operational procedures to achieve a single, fully integrated system.
• Member agencies continue to employ their existing command staff and fire station personnel
Phase 2: Fire Headquarters Services (targeted effective July 1, 2011)
• Fire command and administrative positions to be employed by the JPA with the costs to be shared among all agencies using the agreed cost sharing formula
Phase 3: Fire Station Services: (targeted effective July 1, 2012)
• All operational fire station personnel employed by the JPA
If the Council commits to the JPA, implementation will occur gradually over the next two years. In FY 2010-11, the City would pay its share for Fire Chief Services to the JPA, and would pay for all other services through the current budget process. Under the cost sharing formula and assuming all of the initial cities join the JPA, Monterey’s share of Fire Chief Services in phase 1 is 46.12%, or approximately $105,000. The costs for FY 2011-12 would reflect the cost of the shared headquarters services at approximately the same cost sharing percentage. The plan assumes the shared JPA costs for FY 2012-13 and beyond would utilize the same formula with Monterey’s share approximately 46%. After implementation of Phase 3, all staffing costs would be paid through the JPA.
COMPLETE VERBATIM REPORT "Authorizing and Directing Participation in the Development of a Regional Joint Powers Authority Agreement for Fire Services," by City of Monterey Fire Chief Sam Mazza:
CITY OF MONTEREY
To: City Manager
From: Fire Chief
Date: May 26, 2010
Subject: Authorizing and Directing Participation in the Development of a Regional Joint Powers Authority Agreement for Fire Services
Recommendation:
That the City Council authorize and direct staff to:
1. Continue development of a Joint Powers Authority (JPA) Agreement for fire services with the cities of Pacific Grove, Seaside, and Carmel-by-the-Sea; and
2. Present a final JPA agreement for approval by the City Council as soon as practical for implementation on or shortly after July 1, 2010.
Policy Implications:
The recommended action is consistent with the City Council’s strategic initiative to continue to seek and develop collaborative solutions with other local agencies and jurisdictions to enhance service levels, operational efficiency, and cost-effectiveness of fire and EMS services.
Fiscal Implications:
As proposed, the JPA would be implemented in three phases over approximately two years as described in the Discussion section of this report. The JPA would yield significant cost savings to the City for fire services, estimated to be $70,000 for Phase 1 and $340,000 annually for Phase 2 and thereafter. These savings would be reduced if any of the four “core” cities (Monterey, Seaside, Pacific Grove, and Carmel) should elect not to participate in the JPA.
Council should also be aware that Monterey has agreed to modify the fiscal model for existing contract fire services to Pacific Grove during the first phase to reflect incremental costs in lieu of the current proportional share methodology. That contract authorizes the City Managers of Monterey and Pacific Grove to revise the fiscal model by mutual written agreement, and this modification was offered to make the fiscal analysis more comparable between the proposed JPA alternative and a CalFIRE proposal that was also being considered by Pacific Grove. Under this revised fiscal methodology, Pacific Grove and Carmel will pay the incremental costs of the two former Pacific Grove chief officers for phase one. Pacific Grove will also continue to pay the direct personnel costs to staff the Pacific Grove station.
In phase two, all the participating cities will pay their proportionate share of all headquarters costs, and Pacific Grove will continue to pay the direct personnel costs associated with the Pacific Grove station. In phase three, all partner agencies will pay their proportionate share of headquarters costs and all direct costs associated with the staffing and operation of their respective fire stations.
Alternatives Considered:
No alternatives are suggested. Council could elect not to approve the proposed Resolution; however such action would result in higher costs for stand-alone fire services and would not be consistent with previous Council policy direction.
Discussion:
Background
The City of Monterey has participated with other local jurisdictions in shared services partnerships for many years, including the Fort Ord Reuse Authority (FORA), Transportation Agency of Monterey County (TAMC), Monterey Regional Water Pollution Control Agency (MRWPCA), Monterey-Salinas Transit Authority (MST), and the Presidio Municipal Services Agency (PMSA).
Specific to fire services, Monterey currently provides full or partial contract services to the Department of Defense, La Mesa Village, Sand City, Pacific Grove, and Carmel-by-the-Sea. Other local studies and examples of shared fire services include:
1981 LAFCO study of Monterey Peninsula fire services recommends consolidation of Monterey and Monterey Airport fire services
1993 Monterey invites other Peninsula cities to develop fire services Joint Powers Authority (JPA)
2000 Consolidation of Carmel Valley and Mid Carmel Valley Fire Districts
2004 Cities of Seaside and Marina conduct fire consolidation study; proposed consolidation fails to gain approval of Marina City Council
2007 Fire consolidation study conducted by the cities of Monterey, Pacific Grove, and Carmel-by-the-Sea recommends full consolidation using JPA governance model
2008 Symposium of Monterey County fire agency policy and executive-level leaders held to discuss opportunities for fire service partnerships in light of current state and local economic crisis as a window of opportunity to identify common interests and explore common sense alternatives to reduce costs and maintain vital public safety services to our respective communities
2008 Monterey and Pacific Grove consolidate fire personnel; Pacific Grove contracts with Monterey for full fire services
2009 Seaside fire department management and staffing study recommends continuing to expand its efforts with the City of Monterey including discussions regarding the feasibility of forming a sub-regional partnership to provide fire protection and EMS services
The 2004 Seaside-Marina fire service consolidation study and the 2007 fire service consolidation study by the cities of Monterey, Pacific Grove, and Carmel-by-the-Sea both concluded that consolidation of fire services among the cities would provide enhanced fiscal and operational efficiencies and effectiveness. Both studies recommended a Joint Powers Authority (JPA) as the best-fit governance model, and further recommended merging the existing fire management staffs to provide the capacity to conduct the longer range detailed analysis and planning necessary to achieve full consolidation.
In October 2009, the Monterey County Mayors Association tasked the City Managers to explore opportunities to achieve enhanced fiscal and operational efficiencies by sharing fire services. This led to a November 2009 meeting of Monterey Peninsula City Managers and other fire agency policy-level and executive-level leaders to further discuss conceptual approaches to achieving the Mayors’ Association goal. These discussions highlighted the current window of opportunity to achieve fiscal and operational efficiencies by improving organizational efficiencies in the multiple small fire agencies within the greater Monterey Peninsula region. The discussions resulted in general consensus that the concept of a joint sub-regional fire agency had sufficient merit to warrant further discussion and analysis, and a “core” group of six cities including Monterey, Seaside, Pacific Grove, Carmel, Sand City, and Del Rey Oaks was formed to further develop a solution that could be implemented relatively quickly yet be scaled to accommodate future partner jurisdictions. The objectives of this working group were to work cooperatively to:
• Identify and frame the key issues
• Define the scope and scale of a joint fire services agency
• Identify and explore shared governance options and associated costs
• Develop guiding principles
Council authorized participation in this initial study and analysis of joint sub-regional fire service options in December 2009. Participation did not commit the City to any proposed outcome, but rather provided the authority to participate in the working group’s analysis necessary to determine whether any of the potential joint services options could benefit Monterey and provide a higher level of service to the entire region by better utilizing existing resources.
Since then, a JPA Working Group consisting of management staff of the six “core” cities has identified a Joint Powers Authority agreement as a viable and the preferred alternative to achieve the desired fiscal and operational efficiencies. This group has also initiated development of the framework of a JPA governance agreement. In addition, a JPA Executive Committee consisting of the City Managers of the “core” cities has endorsed the Working Group’s recommendations relative to this preferred solution and key points of the draft governance agreement.
Current Proposal
A Joint Powers Authority (JPA) is a public entity created by agreement of two or more public agencies pursuant to Division 7, Chapter 5, Article 1, Sections 6500 et seq. of the California Government Code. Essentially, a JPA has powers and responsibilities similar to other public agencies, limited by the terms of the governing agreement. Each member agency appoints representatives to the JPA Board of Directors, which makes policy-level decisions governing the Authority.
The approach being considered for this Fire JPA would provide member agencies equal membership on the JPA Board of Directors. All agencies would continue to own their respective fire station facilities and equipment. Cost and operational advantages would accrue through economies of scale, particularly with consolidated headquarters staffing. Instead of operating as several independent fire departments, the envisioned JPA would operate as one unified department, with one Fire Chief and management staff scaled to manage the stations and personnel within the regional system.
Another key consideration regarding the JPA is its potential for fostering future cost-efficiency improvements through other forms of shared services. When successful, the JPA agreement could serve as a model for other regional services, such as police and public works.
The proposed JPA would be effective July 1, 2010 or as soon as possible thereafter, and would begin demonstrating operational and cost efficiencies immediately. However, due to significant administrative and labor relations matters that take considerable time to resolve (e.g., development of a CalPERS contract for a new agency can take one year or more before approval), the JPA is proposed to be implemented in three phases over approximately two years as follows:
Phase 1: Fire Chief Services (targeted effective July 1, 2010)
• JPA Board of Directors formed; initial members are agencies with fire resources: Seaside, Carmel-by-the-Sea, Monterey, and Pacific Grove
• Del Rey Oaks and Sand City will continue existing contractual relationships with Seaside and Monterey respectively during Phase 1
• JPA employs Fire Chief with the costs to be shared among all agencies using agreed cost sharing formula
• Member agencies appoint JPA Fire Chief as agency’s Fire Chief, with all authority to direct staff
• JPA Fire Chief would implement procedures to effect functional integration of member agencies’ fire services as soon as possible, including standardized training and operational procedures to achieve a single, fully integrated system.
• Member agencies continue to employ their existing command staff and fire station personnel
Phase 2: Fire Headquarters Services (targeted effective July 1, 2011)
• Fire command and administrative positions to be employed by the JPA with the costs to be shared among all agencies using the agreed cost sharing formula
Phase 3: Fire Station Services: (targeted effective July 1, 2012)
• All operational fire station personnel employed by the JPA
If the Council commits to the JPA, implementation will occur gradually over the next two years. In FY 2010-11, the City would pay its share for Fire Chief Services to the JPA, and would pay for all other services through the current budget process. Under the cost sharing formula and assuming all of the initial cities join the JPA, Monterey’s share of Fire Chief Services in phase 1 is 46.12%, or approximately $105,000. The costs for FY 2011-12 would reflect the cost of the shared headquarters services at approximately the same cost sharing percentage. The plan assumes the shared JPA costs for FY 2012-13 and beyond would utilize the same formula with Monterey’s share approximately 46%. After implementation of Phase 3, all staffing costs would be paid through the JPA.
At their May 12, 2010 meeting, the Pacific Grove City Council unanimously authorized participation in the development of the proposed JPA agreement, and the Seaside City Council will consider similar action on May 20. In addition, the Monterey Fire Fighters Association, Monterey Fire Management Association, Seaside Public Safety Management Association, and Carmel Professional Firefighters Association all endorse the regional fire JPA proposal.
HIGHLIGHTS of the City of Pacific Grove City Manager Thomas Frutchey’s Agenda Report “Selection of Preferred Option for Future Fire Services:”
CITY OF PACIFIC GROVE
300 Forest Avenue, Pacific Grove, California 93950
AGENDA REPORT
May 5, 2010
SUBJECT: Selection of Preferred Option for Future Fire Services
RECOMMENDATION
Direct staff to:
1. Continue working with Carmel-by-the-Sea, Monterey, Seaside and other jurisdictions on the peninsula to fully develop a Joint Powers Authority for fire services; and
2. Present a finalized agreement for approval at either the June 2 or June 16 City Council meeting to implement the first phase of the JPA, effective July 1, 2010.
Conclusion. As outlined above, both CAL FIRE and a Monterey Peninsula JPA could provide high-quality fire services for the City of Pacific Grove. On balance, however, the JPA option (Scenario #4, above) is clearly preferable, for 5 primary reasons:
• Shared governance and local control;
• The $0.6M lower cost for next fiscal year and the comparable average annual cost over the first five years;
• The potential for evolving services and reducing costs (including a two-tiered retirement system) over time;
• The potential for expanding the JPA into additional service areas; and
• If the JPA doesn’t work, we then would have several options, including transitioning into a contract with CAL FIRE. However, if we were to go with CAL FIRE and were not satisfied, there is no easy way to transition to another approach.
Staff believes that this JPA represents an opportunity that may not arise again for many years to create a new model for collaborative service delivery that could be adapted for other City services and serve as a powerful tool for achieving long-term financial sustainability for Pacific Grove.
Thomas Frutchey
City Manager
CITY OF SEASIDE REGULAR MEETING
CITY COUNCIL AGENDA 440 Harcourt Avenue, Seaside
Thursday, May 20, 2010
7:00 p.m.
A G E N D A
BUSINESS ITEMS
16. Participation in the Regional Fire Services Joint Powers Authority
PURPOSE: Receive an update on the formation of the Regional Fire Services Joint Powers Authority and to consider membership in the Authority.
RECOMMENDATION: It is recommended that the City Council:
1. Receive and accept a report on the Regional Fire Services Joint Powers Authority;
2. Approve membership in the Regional Fire Services Joint Powers Authority and authorize staff to continue working with Carmel-by-the-Sea, Monterey, Pacific Grove and other jurisdictions on the Peninsula to fully develop a Joint Powers Authority for fire services;
3. Authorize the Mayor to sign the final agreement for the Regional Fire Services Joint Powers Authority for implementation of the first phase of the JPA, effective July 1, 2010.
ITEM NO. 16
CITY OF SEASIDE
STAFF REPORT
TO: Honorable Mayor and City Council
FROM: Ray Corpuz, City Manager
BY: Jerry Wombacher, Fire Chief
Daphne Hodgson, Deputy City Manager – Administrative Services
DATE: May 20, 2010
SUBJECT: PARTICIPATION IN THE REGIONAL FIRE SERVICES JOINT POWERS AUTHORITY
PURPOSE
The purpose of this item is to give the City Council an opportunity to receive an update on the formation of the Regional Fire Services Joint Powers Authority and to consider membership in the Authority.
RECOMMENDATION
It is recommended that the City Council:
1. Receive and accept a report on the Regional Fire Services Joint Powers Authority;
2. Approve membership in the Regional Fire Services Joint Powers Authority and authorize staff to continue working with Carmel-by-the-Sea, Monterey, Pacific Grove and other jurisdictions on the Peninsula to fully develop a Joint Powers Authority for fire services;
3. Authorize the Mayor to sign the final agreement for the Regional Fire Services Joint Powers Authority for implementation of the first phase of the JPA, effective July 1, 2010.
BENEFITS OF A JPA
The JPA option would optimize local control for fire services, and establish the City’s governance authority, albeit in a shared fashion, with other member agencies. The approach being considered would provide member agencies equal membership on the JPA Board. All agencies would continue to own their respective fire station facilities and equipment. Cost and operational advantages would accrue through economies of scale, especially in consolidated headquarters staffing. Instead of operating as several independent fire departments, the envisioned JPA would operate as one unified department, with one Fire Chief and a management staff scaled to only the minimum number of management staff required to manage the stations in the system.
The advantages of local control are especially compelling now, as cities and the State struggle with the anticipated spiking of employee retirement costs in the coming years. The Monterey County Mayors also tasked the city managers with tackling the retirement cost problem in a collaborative way and to affect needed changes without creating recruitment competitiveness disparities. So far, the city managers have all committed to pursuing second-tier benefit plans for future JPA employees, which would save significant money in the future. In addition, the city managers of the prospective JPA member cities have reiterated the vital importance of this change and acknowledge the opportunity for controlling these costs at the local level.
JOINT EXERCISE OF POWERS AGREEMENT FOR THE [Name to be determined] BY AND BETWEEN THE CITIES OF MONTEREY, PACIFIC GROVE, SEASIDE AND CARMEL-BY-THE-SEA
JOINT EXERCISE OF POWERS AGREEMENT
FOR THE [Name to be determined]
BY AND BETWEEN THE CITIES OF MONTEREY, PACIFIC GROVE, SEASIDE AND CARMEL-BY-THE-SEA
THIS JOINT EXERCISE OF POWERS AGREEMENT (“Agreement”), is made and entered into as of the ____ day of ______________, 2010 by and between the City of Monterey, a charter city, the City of Pacific Grove, a charter city, the City of Seaside, a general law city, and the City of Carmel-by-the-Sea, a charter city, each duly organized and existing in the County of Monterey, State of California under the constitution and laws of the State of California (individually or collectively referred to as “Member” or “Members”).
W I T N E S S E T H:
WHEREAS, each of the Members has authority for the provision of fire protection services within its respective jurisdiction; and
WHEREAS, the jurisdictional areas of the Members are contiguous to each other, are developed to substantially the same level of density, and are susceptible to the provision of fire protection services and facilities under common administration and management and with the same or similar equipment, resources, and personnel; and
WHEREAS, the Members recognize the advantages and efficiencies of consolidating each Member’s individual fire service resources into a single regional fire service agency to improve effectiveness through standardization and shared resources, and to enhance fiscal responsibility by eliminating duplication and achieving efficiencies through the operation and governance of a Joint Powers Authority (“JPA” or “Authority”); and
WHEREAS, the separate management and administration of fire services in each jurisdictional area by each of the respective Members, using separate equipment, resources, and personnel have resulted in duplication of effort, multiple administrations, and additional costs, which, in the judgment of the Members, could be eliminated, to the substantial advantage and benefit of the citizens and taxpayers of the Members, if the administration and management of the fire protection facilities and services employing common equipment, resources, and personnel were to be consolidated in a single public entity; and
WHEREAS, combining the management and administration of the Members as well as the equipment, resources, and personnel, can reduce costs and also lead to a higher level and quality of service; and
WHEREAS, the Joint Exercise of Powers Act (Government Code Section 6500 et seq. “the Act”) provides that two or more public Members may by agreement jointly exercise any powers common to the parties to the agreement and may by that agreement create an entity that is separate from the parties to the agreement; and
WHEREAS, members of a JPA have availed themselves of the right under Government Code Section 6508.1 to specify in the joint powers agreement that the liabilities of the JPA are not the liabilities of its Members; and
WHEREAS, the various Members have already demonstrated their ability to achieve service enhancements and efficiencies by contracting with each other, jointly training and providing services, and otherwise achieving functional consolidation in a wide variety of service areas; and
WHEREAS, the ongoing and increasing fiscal pressures on all Members make it imperative that they seek and take advantage of every conceivable opportunity to improve the cost-effectiveness of their services; and
WHEREAS, as a result of lengthy negotiations, the Members recognize the benefits of combining their respective fire service providers into one provider, and all desire to receive their fire services from a JPA; and
WHEREAS, the Members envision that the JPA will evolve to include other municipal services as opportunities for improved services and cost effectiveness arise.
WHEREAS, the governing board of each Member has determined it to be in the Member’s best interest and in the public interest that this Agreement be executed and that it is a participating Member of the this JPA; and
WHEREAS, by this Agreement, the Members desire to create and establish a JPA to provide the structure for this consolidation, and to enable the initial phase of the consolidation to be implemented, set forth terms and conditions governing the management, operation, and financing of what will be called the [name to be determined] and to exercise the powers described herein and as provided by law; and such is the purpose of this Agreement;
NOW, THEREFORE, in consideration of the mutual promises and covenants contained herein, the Members hereto agree as follows:
ARTICLE I
DEFINITIONS
Section 1.1. Definitions.
For purposes of this Agreement, the following words shall have the following meanings.
“Act” means the Joint Exercise of Powers Act of the State of California, California Government Code Sections 6500 et seq., as it now exists or may hereafter be amended.
“Agreement” means this Joint Exercise of Powers Agreement.
“Authority” means the [name to be determined], the joint powers authority or JPA established by this Agreement as authorized by Government Code Section 6503.5.
“Board of Directors” or “Board” means the governing body of the Authority.
“Bonds” means bonds, notes or other obligations of the Authority issued pursuant to any provision of law which may be used by the Authority for the authorization and issuance of bonds, notes or other obligations.
“Bond interest and redemption expenses” means those sums of money required to be expended by the Authority from any bond interest and redemption fund to be established and maintained by the Authority for the payment of principal of and interest on bonds (if any) issued pursuant to this Agreement.
“Bond Law” means Article 2 of the Act, as now or hereafter amended, or any other law hereafter legally available for use by the Authority in the authorization and issuance of bonds to finance needed public facilities or services.
“County” means the County of Monterey, State of California.
“Fire Chief” means a person designated by the Board to plan, direct, manage, and oversee the activities and operations of the Authority including, but not necessarily limited to, fire suppression, hazardous material mitigation, fire and life safety code compliance and administrative support services.
“Fiscal Year” means the period from July 1st to and including the following June 30th, or such other period as the Board may specify by resolution.
“Finance Director” means the Finance Director of the Authority designated pursuant to Section 4.8 of this Agreement.
“Inception period” means the five-year period from the effective date of this Agreement.
“Joint Facilities” means all existing fire protection facilities, equipment, resources and property to be managed and operated by the Authority pursuant to Sections 2.2, 2.3, 4.16, and 5.4 hereof, (as particularly set forth in Exhibit “B” hereto attached and made a part hereof by reference) and, if and when acquired or constructed, any improvements and additions thereto and any additional facilities or property acquired or constructed by the Authority or the Members.
“Operation and Maintenance Costs” means those sums of money required to be expended by the Authority from a fund to be established and maintained by the Authority to finance the cost of maintaining and operating the Joint Facilities subject to the provisions of Section 4.16, including all administrative and management costs and all costs of maintaining equipment, resources and property and all personnel costs incurred after July 1, 2010, but excluding all capital costs and all costs of special services.
“Measure” or “Measures” means a revenue measure proposed by the Authority or two or more revenue measures proposed by each of the Members to assist the Members in funding their financial obligations to the Authority under this Agreement. If two or more revenue measures are proposed, “Success of the Measure” shall mean successful approval of all measures.
“Members” and “Member.” “Members” means the parties to this Agreement and “Member” means one such Member.
“Operating Fund” is defined in Section 5.4 of this Agreement.
“Secretary” means the secretary of the Authority designated pursuant to Section 4.7 of this Agreement.
“Service Area” means the combined aggregate jurisdictional service areas of the Members as they now exist and as they may hereafter be modified by annexation of territory to or exclusion of territory from the boundaries of any of the Members. The combined aggregate service areas of the Members as they now exist are delineated on the map attached hereto as Exhibit “A” and hereby made a part of this Agreement.
“State” means the State of California.
“Treasurer” means the Treasurer of the Authority designated pursuant to Section 4.8 of this Agreement.
ARTICLE II
GENERAL PROVISIONS
Section 2.1 Creation of [name to be determined].
(a) Pursuant to Section 6503.5 of the Act, the Members hereby create a public entity separate and independent from the Members hereto, hereafter to be known as the “[name to be determined],” pursuant to the terms and conditions set forth in this Agreement.
(b) Within 30 days after the effective date of this Agreement and after any amendment, the Authority shall cause a notice of such Agreement or amendment to be prepared and filed with the office of the California Secretary of State containing the information required by California Government Code Section 6503.5.
(c) Within 10 days after the effective date of this Agreement, the Authority shall cause a statement of the information concerning the Authority, required by California Government Code Section 53051, to be filed with the office of the California Secretary of State and with the County Clerk, amending and clarifying the facts required to be stated pursuant to subdivision (a) of Government Code Section 53051.
Section 2.2 Purpose.
The purpose of the Authority is to improve effectiveness of fire service through standardization, uniform adoption of best practices, and shared capabilities that one jurisdiction could not afford or otherwise provide, and to enhance fiscal responsibility by eliminating duplication of capabilities, through the governance of a Joint Powers Authority. In furtherance of this purpose, the Authority shall exercise the common powers of the Members to manage, operate, and maintain the Joint Facilities and to implement the financing, acquiring and constructing of additions and improvements to the Joint Facilities to provide the Area with efficient and economical fire protection services, and, if necessary, to issue and repay Bonds of the Authority. The Authority’s purpose is not to determine if, when, or how any of its Members approve development within their respective jurisdictions. Each of the Members is authorized to exercise all such powers (except the power to issue and repay revenue Bonds of the Authority) pursuant to its organic law and the Authority is authorized to issue and provide for the repayment of Bonds pursuant to the provisions of the Bond Law or other applicable law.
Section 2.3 Ownership of Joint Facilities.
Each Member shall continue to own that portion of the Joint Facilities now owned by each, respectively.
Section 2.4 Effective Date.
This Agreement shall be effective as of July 1, 2010.
Section 2.5 Term.
The term of this Agreement is 10 years.
ARTICLE III
POWERS AND OBLIGATIONS OF THE AUTHORITY
Section 3.1 General Powers.
The Authority shall have the power in its own name to exercise any and all common powers of its Members reasonably related to the purposes of the Authority, including but not limited to, the powers to:
(a) Seek, receive and administer funding from any available public or private source, including grants or loans under any federal, state and local programs for assistance in achieving the purposes of the Authority;
(b) Contract for the services of engineers, attorneys, planners, financial and other necessary consultants;
(c) Contract for supply, maintenance, and repair of Joint Facilities, vehicles, equipment, resources, and property and pay all Operation and Maintenance costs;
(d) Make and enter into any other contracts;
(e) Employ agents, officers and employees;
(f) Acquire, lease, construct, own, manage, maintain, operate, or dispose of (subject to the limitations herein) any buildings, works, or improvements;
(g) Acquire, hold manage, maintain, or dispose of any other real or personal property by any lawful means, including without limitation gift, purchase, eminent domain, lease, leasepurchase, license, or sale;
(h) Incur all authorized debts, liabilities, and obligations, including issuance and sale of bonds, notes, certificates of participation, bonds authorized pursuant to the Marks-Roos Local Bond Pooling Act of 1985, California Government Code Sections 6584 et seq. (as it now exists or may hereafter be amended), or any other legal authority common to the Members and such other evidences of indebtedness, subject to the limitations herein;
(i) Receive gifts, contributions, and donations or property, funds, services, and other forms of financial or other assistance from any persons, firms, corporations, or governmental entities, or any source;
(j) Sue and be sued in its own name and to take any or all legal or equitable actions, including but not limited to injunction and specific performance, necessary or permitted by law to enforce this Agreement;
(k) Seek the adoption or defeat of any federal, state, or local legislation or regulation necessary or desirable to accomplish the stated purposes and objectives of the Authority;
(l) Adopt rules, regulations, policies, bylaws, and procedures governing the operation of the Authority;
(m) To invest any money in the treasury pursuant to California Government Code Section 6505.5 that is not required for the immediate necessities of the Authority, as the Authority determines is advisable, in the same manner and upon the same conditions as local Members, pursuant to Section 53601 of the California Government Code as it now exists or may hereafter be amended;
(n) Carry out and enforce all the provisions of this Agreement, and have other powers necessary and proper to carry out the purposes of this Agreement;
(o) Exercise all other powers not specifically mentioned herein, but common to the Members and authorized by California Government Code Section 6508 as it now exists or may hereafter be amended; and
(p) Assign, delegate or contract with a Member or third party to perform any of the duties of the Board.
Section 3.2 Specific Powers and Obligations.
(a) Audit. The records and accounts of the Authority shall be audited annually by an independent certified public accountant, as provided in Section 4.8(d).
(b) Securities. The Authority may use any statutory power available to it under the Act and any other applicable laws of the State of California, whether heretofore or hereinafter enacted or amended, for issuance and sale of any revenue bonds or other evidences of indebtedness necessary or desirable to finance the exercise of any power of the Authority, and may borrow from any source including, without limitation, the federal government, for these purposes.
(c) Liabilities. The debts, liabilities or obligations, whether contractual or noncontractual, of the Authority shall be debts, liabilities or obligations of the Authority alone, and not the debts, liabilities and obligations of the Members. (Gov. Code § 6508.1).
(d) Hold Harmless and Indemnification. To the fullest extent permitted by law, the Authority agrees to save, indemnify, defend and hold harmless each Member from any liability, claims, suits, actions, arbitration proceedings, administrative proceedings, regulatory proceedings, losses, expenses or costs of any kind, whether actual, alleged or threatened, including attorney’s fees and costs, court costs, interest, defense costs, and expert witness fees, where the same arise out of, or are in any way attributable in whole or in part, to negligent acts or omissions of the Authority or its employees, officers or agents or the employees, officers or agents of any Member while acting within the course and scope of an Member relationship with the Authority.
(e) Manner of Exercise. For purposes of California Government Code Section 6509, the powers of the Authority shall be exercised subject to the restrictions upon the manner of exercising such powers as are imposed upon the City of Monterey.
(f) Review of Agreement. This Agreement shall be reviewed at a minimum every four years by the members, in order to consider amendments and other proposals; its terms and conditions may be reviewed more frequently whenever the Board agrees to do so.
Section 3.3 Withdrawal from Authority.
(a) Notice. A Member shall provide two years’ written notice to withdraw from the Authority, provided that withdrawals shall not be allowed during the initial five-year period from the effective date of the Agreement (the “inception period”).
(b) Any member withdrawing from the JPA shall be obligated to pay the Authority for the estimated Authority liability for any leave balances its former employees transferred to the Authority and for its share of any other Authority liabilities, including but not limited to Workers Compensation.
Section 3.4 Dissolution of Authority.
(a) Notice. The Authority shall dissolve, and its assets be distributed in accordance with the provisions of this Agreement, upon written notice by the Board of its intention to dissolve the Authority, provided that such notice shall be given 24 months prior to the date of dissolution.
(b) Distribution of Funds and Property. If the Board gives notice of its intent to dissolve the Authority pursuant to Section 3.4(a) above, any remaining funds, property or other assets of the Authority, following discharge of all debts, liabilities and obligations of the Authority, shall be distributed to the Members. The formula used to pay off any remaining unfunded liabilities at the time of dissolution, as well as to divide the assets, shall be the average of the annual funding formulas that have been in effect from July 1, 2010, through the fiscal year in which notice of intent to dissolve the Authority is given. The Members acknowledge that the real property used by the Authority as of the effective date of this Agreement is owned by the Members and will not be distributed according to this formula, but shall remain vested in the Member which owns each parcel. Notwithstanding the provisions of Government Code Section 6512, any remaining funds shall be distributed in accordance with the provisions of this paragraph.
(c) Distribution of Assets Acquired by Authority. Upon termination of this
Agreement, any assets acquired by the Authority during the period of its existence and still on hand shall be distributed to the Members in the manner to be determined by mutual agreement at the time of termination on the basis of appraised value at the time of termination and in accordance with the allocation formula which was in effect at the time of acquisition. The Board shall appoint any needed appraisers, and the cost of such appraisals shall be liabilities of the Authority.
ARTICLE IV
ORGANIZATION, GOVERNANCE AND FUNCTIONS OF AUTHORITY
Section 4.1 Governing Board.
(a) The Board shall govern the Authority in accordance with this Agreement and shall have one Board Member per Member. The policy-making body of each Member shall appoint a Board Member to serve for a term of two years, although a Board Member may be removed during his or her term or reappointed for multiple terms at the pleasure of the Member that appointed him or her. The Board Member so appointed shall be a voting member of the Member’s respective policy-making body or the city manager or equivalent of the Member or a department head of the Member.
(b) All voting power of the Authority shall reside in the Board.
(c) Each Board Member shall cease to be a member of the Board when such Board Member ceases to hold office on the legislative body of the Member that appointed him or her or to be the city manager or equivalent of the Member or to be a department head of the Member. Vacancies shall be filled by the respective appointing Members.
(d) The policy-making body of each Member may appoint one alternate member of the Board who shall serve in the absence of the Board member representing the Member for whom the alternate is appointed. Alternates, who shall be voting members of the Member’s respective policy-making body or the city manager or equivalent of the Member or a Department Head of the Member, shall have no voting power other than when serving for an absent Board member.
(e) The policy-making body of each Member shall also appoint a member to an
Administrative Committee to provide advice to the Board. Members of this Administrative Committee shall serve at the pleasure of the Member that appointed him or her, and vacancies shall be filled by the respective appointing Members.
Section 4.2 Compensation and Expense Reimbursement.
Board members shall not receive a stipend. Each Board member shall be reimbursed for reasonable and necessary expenses actually incurred in the conduct of the Authority’s business, pursuant to an expense reimbursement policy established by the Board in full accordance with all applicable statutory requirements.
Section 4.3 Voting.
All actions of the Board shall require the vote of at least a majority Board of members present and voting. Board members may not cast proxy or absentee votes. Each member shall have an equal vote.
Section 4.4 Weighted Vote.
Actions of the Board shall be by consensus, affirmation, or majority vote of those Board members present with each agency having one vote, unless a weighted vote is requested by any two Board members. In a weighted vote, the weighting would be based on the formula used to allocate shared resource costs among the member agencies. A Board action on a weighted vote requires both a majority of weighted votes and a simple majority vote. The weighted vote issue can be revisited if the JPA Board members represent the entire JPA service area rather than their individual jurisdictions.
Section 4.5 Conflicts of Interest.
(a) Political Reform Act. Board Members shall be considered “public officials” within the meaning of the Political Reform Act of 1974, as amended, and its regulations, for purposes of financial disclosure, conflict of interest and other requirements of such Act and regulations, subject to a contrary opinion or written advice of the California Fair Political Practices Commission. The Authority shall adopt a conflicts of interest code in compliance with the Political Reform Act.
(b) Levine Act. Board Members are “officials” within the meaning of California Government Code Section 84308 et seq., commonly known as the “Levine Act,” and subject to the restrictions of such act on the acceptance, solicitation or direction of contributions.
Section 4.6 Board Meetings.
(a) Time and Place. The Board shall meet at the principal office of the Authority or at such other place designated by the Board if notice is provided in the manner of notice of an adjourned meeting under the Ralph M. Brown Act, California Government Code Section 54950 et seq., The time and place of regular meetings of the Board shall be designated by resolution adopted by the Board, a copy of which shall be furnished to each Member at least 10 days prior to the next such regular meeting.
(b) Call and Conduct. All meetings of the Board shall be called and conducted in accordance with the provisions of the Ralph M. Brown Act and other applicable law. Board meetings shall be conducted also in accordance with such procedures as shall be adopted by the Board by resolution.
(c) Quorum. The Board members representing a majority of Members and a majority of the population in the service area shall constitute a quorum of the Board required to conduct the business of the Authority.
(d) Rules. The Board may adopt from time to time such bylaws, rules and regulations for the affairs of the Authority as are consistent with this Agreement and other applicable law.
(e) Minutes. The Secretary shall cause draft action minutes of all meetings of the Board to be drafted and mailed to each Member promptly after each meeting. Upon approval by the Board, such minutes shall become a part of the official records of the Authority. Section 4.7 Officers.
(a) The Board shall elect a Chair and Vice-Chair from among its members, and shall appoint a Secretary who may, but need not, be a member of the Board. The Chair and Vice-Chair shall serve a term of one year or such other period of time as may be designated in rules or bylaws established by the Board. The officers shall perform the duties normal to said offices, as described below.
(b) Chair. The Chair shall preside over all meetings of the Board and shall sign all contracts on behalf of the Authority, except contracts that the Board may authorize the Fire Chief or another officer, agent, or employee of the Authority to sign. The Chair shall perform such other duties as may be imposed by the Board in accordance with law and this Agreement.
(c) Vice-Chair. The Vice-Chair shall act, sign contracts and perform all of the Chair’s duties in the absence of the Chair.
(d) Secretary. The Secretary shall countersign contracts signed on behalf of the Authority, and shall be the official custodian of all records of the Authority. The Secretary shall attend to such filings as required by applicable law. The Secretary shall perform such other duties as may be imposed by the Board.
Section 4.8 Finance Director and Treasurer.
(a) The ________________ is hereby initially designated as the Finance Director and Treasurer of the Authority. The Board may appoint other persons possessing the qualifications set forth in Government Code Section 6505.5 to either or both of these offices. The Authority shall contract with the person or Member whose employee is appointed as the Finance Director and Treasurer of the Authority. The person or Member providing these services shall give the Authority six months’ written notice of its intention to cease providing these services.
(b) The Treasurer shall be the depositary and shall have custody of all of the accounts, funds and money of the Authority from whatever source. The Finance Director and the Treasurer shall perform the duties and functions and shall assume the obligations and authority set forth in Sections 6505 and 6505.5 of the Act.
(c) The Financial Director and Treasurer shall receive, invest, and disburse funds only in accord with procedures established by the Board and in conformity with applicable law.
(d) Annual Audits and Audit Reports. The Financial Director/Treasurer shall cause an annual financial audit to be made by an independent certified public accountant with respect to all JPA receipts, disbursements, other transactions and entries into the books. A report of the financial audit will be filed as a public record with each Member. The audit will be filed no later than required by State law. The Authority shall pay the cost of the financial audit and charge the cost against the Members in the same manner as other administrative costs.
(e) The Finance Director and Treasurer shall secure a fidelity bond. Section 4.9 Legal Advisor. The Board shall appoint a Legal Advisor for the Authority who shall provide legal advice and such other services as may be prescribed by the Board. Subject to such provisions of the Rules of Professional Conduct and other law as may apply, the City Attorney or their equivalent of one of the Members may serve as Legal Advisor for the Authority.
Section 4.10 Fire Chief.
The Board shall hire, evaluate, and terminate the Fire Chief, who shall be chief executive officer of the Authority and shall report to the Board. The Board may delegate the hiring, evaluating, and terminating of the Fire Chief to an Executive Committee comprising some or all of the City Managers or equivalent executive positions of the Members. The Fire Chief shall have the power to hire, evaluate, and discharge all subordinate employees of the Authority.
Section 4.11 Additional Required Services.
a. Finance, Human Resources and IT. The Authority shall initially contract with _________for finance, purchasing, risk management, information technology, and human resources services. These services shall be evaluated during each review of this Agreement as provided for in Section 3.2(f), or when directed by the Board.
Upon any such review, any Member may submit a proposal for the Board’s
consideration and, if none do so, the Board may contract with another qualified public entity to provide those services. A Member providing these services shall give the Authority and the other Members six months’ written notice of its intention to cease providing these services.
b. Equipment Maintenance. The Authority shall initially contract with ____________ for equipment maintenance of the Authority’s vehicles.
Section 4.12 Additional Officers and Consultants.
The Board may appoint additional officers deemed necessary or desirable. Such additional officers also may be officers or employees of a Member or of the Authority. The Board may also retain such other consultants or independent contractors as may be deemed necessary or appropriate to carry out the purposes of this Agreement.
Section 4.13 Bonding Requirements.
The officers or persons designated to have charge of, handle, or have access to any funds or property of the Authority shall be so designated and empowered by the Board. Each such officer or person may be required to file an official bond with the Authority in an amount established by the Board. Should existing bond or bonds of any such officer or persons be extended to cover the obligations provided herein, said bond shall be the official bond required herein. The premiums on any such bond attributable to the coverage required herein shall be appropriate expenses of the Authority. If it is prudent to do so, the Authority may procure a blanket bond on behalf of all such officers and persons.
Section 4.14 Status of Officers and Employees.
All of the privileges and immunities from liability, exemption from laws, ordinances and rules, all pension, relief, disability, worker’s compensation, and other benefits which apply to the activities of officers, agents or employees of the Authority when performing their respective functions within the territorial limits of a Member shall apply to them to the same degree and extent while engaged in the performance of any of their functions and duties under the provisions of this Agreement and Chapter 5 of Division 7 of Title 1 of the California Government Code, commencing with Section 6500. However, none of the officers, agents or employees appointed by the Board shall be deemed to be employed by any of the Members or to be subject to any of the requirements of such Members by reason of their employment by the Authority.
Section 4.15 Committees.
The Board may create standing and ad hoc committees to give advice to the Board of Directors on such matters as may be referred to such committees by the Board. Qualified persons shall be appointed to such committees by the Board and each such appointee shall serve at the pleasure of the Board. All regular, adjourned and special meetings of such committees shall be called and conducted in accordance with the applicable requirements of the Ralph M. Brown Act, Government Code Sections 54950 et seq., as it now exists or may hereafter be amended, and all other applicable law.
Section 4.16 Initial and Subsequent Phases of JPA
(a) The initial phase (“First Phase”) of the JPA will be for Fire Chief services.
(b) The Second Phase of the JPA will include headquarters Fire functions. These headquarters functions shall include, but not be limited to, Fire Administration, Fire Training, Fire Prevention, and the Duty Chief component of Fire Operations.
(c) The Third Phase of the JPA will be for full Fire services, including the remainder of Fire Operations, specifically the fire engine companies, ladder truck companies, and relief firefighters, as determined by the Board.
(d) As soon as practical after the effective date of the JPA, the First Phase of the JPA shall be implemented. The timing and manner of the implementation of the Second Phase and the Third Phase of the JPA shall be determined by the Board.
ARTICLE V
OPERATIONS AND FACILITIES
Section 5.1 Principal Office.
(a) The Principal Office of the Authority shall initially be the current office maintained by Monterey Fire Department in the City of Monterey. The Authority may establish another principal office from time to time by resolution of the Board.
(b) The Authority shall initially lease space for its Principal Office from Monterey. This lease shall be evaluated during each review of this Agreement as provided for in Section 3.2(f), or when directed by the Board. Upon any such review, any Member may submit a proposal for the Board’s consideration and, if no Member does so, the Board may arrange to lease space from another landlord. A Member providing space shall give the Authority and the other Members 6 months' written notice of its intention to cease providing that space.
Section 5.2 Assumption of Responsibilities by the Authority.
As soon as practicable after the effective date of this Agreement, the Members shall appoint their representatives to the Board and the City Managers or their equivalents shall jointly give notice of an organizational meeting of the Board. At said meeting the Board shall provide for its regular meetings, shall elect a Chair and Vice-Chair, and shall appoint a Secretary as prescribed in Article IV. The Fire Chief shall give notice of an organization meeting of the Board annually thereafter.
Section 5.3 Delegation of Powers; Transfer of Records, Accounts, Funds, and
Property.
Subject to the provisions of Section 4.16, each of the members hereby delegates to the Authority the power and duty to maintain, operate, manage and control all of the fire protection facilities, equipment, resources and property of each of the respective Members within their territorial jurisdiction, as well as those a Member or the Authority may acquire in the future, including without limitation all fire stations, land, buildings and fire-fighting equipment, and to employ the necessary personnel and to do any and all other things necessary or desirable to provide continued, efficient, and economical fire protection services to the Area. The facilities managed by the Authority as provided in this paragraph constitute the Joint Facilities.
Section 5.4 Joint Fire Protection Operations and Maintenance Fund; Reserves and Capital.
The Authority shall create a joint fire protection operations and maintenance fund (herein called the “Operating Fund”). Upon the organization of the Board, the Authority shall maintain the Operating Fund and shall pay all personnel, contractual and administrative expenses of the Authority. Each of the Members shall pay into that fund its share of these costs of the Authority as set forth in Article VI of this Agreement. The Authority shall establish reasonable reserves as approved by the Members via annual budgets.
Subject to the provisions of Section 4.16, initially the Members intend for each Member to pay for the costs of owning, maintaining, repairing and replacing the fire stations and the fire apparatus in the stations and specified equipment and supplies for the fire stations and fire apparatus in the Member’s jurisdiction. Any Member who does not have a fire station in its jurisdiction will pay a portion of the costs of the stations and apparatus of the Members that have stations and apparatus, in accordance with budget policies adopted by the Board.
Section 5.5 Existing Scope of Joint Facilities and Services.
Upon commencement of this Agreement, each Member shall have fire stations within its jurisdiction with an engine company at each location. Subject to the provisions of Section 4.16, changes in the number of stations and the provision of staffing and fire safety services at each station shall be determined by the Board and specified in the annual budget.
ARTICLE VI
BUDGET: FUNDING FORMULA AND OTHER FINANCIAL PROVISIONS
Section 6.1 Annual Budget.
The Authority shall adopt an annual budget for each fiscal year. No expenditures may be made by or on behalf of the Authority unless authorized by a budget or budget amendment.
Section 6.2 Funding Formula.
Subject to the provisions of Section 4.16, the Authority’s command, administrative, and administrative overhead costs will be considered shared resources, and these costs will be
allocated among the member jurisdictions according to a shared resources cost allocation formula. These costs will include Fire Department management (e.g. Fire Chief, Assistant Fire Chief, Division/ Battalion Chiefs), fire prevention staff, fire training staff, and fire administrative analyst and/or fire administrative assistant support staff, as well as their supplies and services, equipment, vehicles, and office space. Subject to the Third Phase of the JPA provisions of Section 4.16, these costs will also include probationary fire academy training costs for new firefighters prior to their being assigned to an engine company, and relief firefighters. The shared resources costs will also include administrative overhead costs such as human resources, finance, risk management, it, and legal costs. In the Third Phase of the JPA, the shared resources may include line staff and/or other staff as determined by the Board.
The shared resources cost allocation formula is based on three factors, weighted separately. The three factors are: population, number of incidents (rolling three-year average), and minimum daily line staff in each Member jurisdiction and any jurisdiction for which the Member provides contractual fire service. The population and minimum daily line staff factors will be weighted equally, and the number of incidents (rolling three-year average) will be weighted twice as heavily as each of the other two factors. The shared resources cost allocation formula percentages for each Member will be updated by the Board annually, as well as any time a Member joins or leaves the Authority.
Starting in the Second Phase of the JPA as provided in Section 4.16, fire prevention fees shall be retained by the JPA and allocated among its member agencies according to the shared resources cost allocation formula.
Section 6.3 Allocation of Expenses.
After the Board approves submission of an annual budget to the Members, the Fire Chief shall forward that budget to each Member, along with his or her calculation of the share to be borne by each Member under the formula stated in Section 6.2 above. Approval of the budget by the Board shall also constitute approval of the allocation of the budget cost as calculated by the Fire Chief.
Section 6.4 Expenditures within Approved Annual Budget.
All expenditures within the limitations of the approved annual budget shall be made in accordance with the rules, policies, and procedures adopted by the Board.
Section 6.5 Disbursements.
Warrants shall be drawn upon the approval and written order of the Board and the Board shall requisition the payment of funds only upon approval of claims, disbursements and other requisitions for payment in accordance with the Agreement and other rules, regulations, policies and procedures adopted by the Board.
Section 6.6 Accounts.
All funds will be placed in the Operating Fund and the receipt, transfer, or disbursement of such funds by the Controller and the Treasurer shall be accounted for in accordance with the generally accepted accounting principles applicable to governmental entities, with strict accountability of all funds. All revenues, expenditures and status of bank accounts and investments shall be reported to the Board as frequently as the Board shall direct and, in any event, not less than annually, pursuant to procedures established by the Board.
Section 6.7 Establishment and Administration of Funds.
(a) The Authority is responsible for the strict accountability for all funds and reporting of all receipts and disbursements. It shall comply with every provision of law relating to the establishment and administration of funds, particularly Government Code Section 6505.
(b) All funds shall be accounted for on a full accrual basis.
ARTICLE VII
DISPUTE RESOLUTION
Section 7.1 Good Faith Negotiations.
The Members acknowledge that differences between them and among the Board
Members may arise from time to time and agree to make good faith efforts to resolve any such differences by means of good faith negotiations among the Members or Board Members, as the case may be. If such negotiations do not resolve a dispute, and no Member gives a notice to dissolve the Authority, as provided in this Agreement, then the Members shall resolve disputes in any manner permitted by law or in equity.
ARTICLE VIII
EMPLOYEE RELATIONS
Section 8.1 Employee Relations.
The Board shall maintain as necessary Employer-Employee Relations Procedures and Personnel Rules and Regulations applicable to the Authority. The Board may amend either or both items without referring the items to the Members.
Section 8.2 Annual Budget Issues.
In conjunction with the annual budget process described above, the Board shall consider the following: cost allocation plan, service goals, service performance standards, and labor relations agreements or memoranda of understanding (“MOU”), unless a multi-year MOU is in place.
Section 8.3 Bargaining.
Bargaining under the Meyers-Milias-Brown Act shall proceed as set forth in this section. Employees of the Authority are not employees of any Member. The Board and staff negotiators shall negotiate with the representatives of the Authority’s employees. After tentative agreement has been reached by the negotiating team and the representatives of the Authority’s employees, the Board shall act on the agreement.
ARTICLE IX
MISCELLANEOUS
Section 9.1 Amendments.
This Agreement may be amended by an affirmative vote of the governing bodies of all of the Members, acting through their governing bodies. A proposed Amendment must be submitted to each Member at least 30 days in advance of the date when the Member will consider it. An Amendment is effective immediately unless otherwise designated.
Section 9.2 Notice.
Any notice required to be given or delivered by any provision of this Agreement shall be personally delivered or deposited in the U.S. Mail, registered or certified, postage prepaid, addressed to the Members at their addresses as reflected in the records of the Authority, and shall be deemed to have been received by the member to which the same is addressed upon the earlier of receipt or 72 hours after mailing.
Section 9.3 Attorney’s Fees.
In the event litigation or other proceeding is required to enforce or interpret any provision of this Agreement, the prevailing Member in such litigation or other proceeding shall be entitled to an award of its actual and reasonable attorney’s fees, costs and expenses incurred in the proceeding.
Section 9.4 Successors.
The Agreement shall be binding upon and inure to the benefit of any successor of a Member.
Section 9.5 Assignment and Delegation.
No Member may assign any rights or delegate any duties under this Agreement without the unanimous written consent of all other Members and any attempt to make such an assignment shall be null and void for all purposes. No creditor, assignee, or third party beneficiary of a Member has a right, claim, or title to any part, share, interest, fund, or asset of the Authority. However, nothing in this Section prevents the Board from assigning any interest or right it may have under this Agreement to a third party.
Section 9.6 Counterparts.
This Agreement may be executed in one or more counterparts, all of which together shall constitute a single agreement, and each of which shall be an original for all purposes.
Section 9.7 Severability.
Should any part, term or provision of this Agreement be decided by any court of competent jurisdiction to be illegal or in conflict with any applicable law, or otherwise rendered unenforceable or ineffectual, the validity of the remaining parts, terms, or provisions of this Agreement shall not be affected thereby and to that end the parts, terms and provisions of this Agreement are severable.
Section 9.8 Integration.
This Agreement represents the full and entire Agreement among the Members with respect to the matters covered herein, and includes and incorporates by reference Exhibits A and B attached hereto.
Section 9.9 Parties to Agreement.
Each Member certifies that it intends to, and does, contract with every other Member which is a signatory to this Agreement and, in addition, with such other Member as may be later added as Members. Each Member also certifies that the deletion of any Member from this Agreement does not affect this Agreement or each remaining Member’s intent to contract with other Members then remaining.
Section 9.10 New Members.
All Members admitted after January 1, 2011 are New Members. A public entity may be admitted as a New Member only upon a two-thirds (2/3) vote of the Board and upon complying with all other requirements established by the Board and the Bylaws. Each applicant for membership as a New Member must pay all fees and expenses, if any, set by the Board.
Section 9.11 Liability Limits.
Subject to limitations thereon contained in any trust agreement or other documents pursuant to which Authority financing may implement, funds of the Authority may be used to defend, indemnify, and hold harmless the Authority, any Member, any Board Member or alternate, or any employee or officer of the Authority for their actions taken within the scope of their duties while acting on behalf of the Authority.
Section 9.12 Execution.
The legislative bodies of the members have each authorized execution of this Agreement, as evidenced by their respective signatures attested below.
CITY OF CARMEL-BY-THE-SEA
_______________________________
Mayor
Attest
_______________________________
City Clerk
Approved as to form
_____________________________
City Attorney
CITY OF MONTEREY
_______________________________
Mayor
Attest
_______________________________
City Clerk
Approved as to form
_____________________________
City Attorney
CITY OF PACIFIC GROVE
_______________________________
Mayor
Attest
_______________________________
City Clerk
Approved as to form
_____________________________
City Attorney
CITY OF SEASIDE
_______________________________
Mayor
Attest
_______________________________
City Clerk
Approved as to form
_____________________________
City Attorney
EXHIBITS
EXHIBIT A [Section 1.1]
MAP OF COMBINED, AGGREGATE SERVICE AREAS OF MEMBERS
EXHIBIT B [Section 1.1]
LIST OF EXISTING “JOINT FACILITIES”
NOTE: The signatory parties to the Draft Joint Powers Agreement are the four cities of Carmel-by-the-Sea, Monterey, Pacific Grove and Seaside; the cities of Sand City and Del Rey Oaks are not signatories at this time because Sand City and Del Rey Oaks have decided to continue as contractees, that is Sand City contracts with the City of Monterey and Del Rey Oaks contracts with the City of Seaside.
Source: CITY OF PACIFIC GROVE
300 Forest Avenue, Pacific Grove, California 93950
AGENDA REPORT
TO: Honorable Mayor and Members of the City Council
FROM: Thomas Frutchey, City Manager
MEETING DATE: May 5, 2010
SUBJECT: Selection of Preferred Option for Future Fire Services
CEQA: Does not Constitute a “Project” under California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA) Guidelines
Pages 43-66
FOR THE [Name to be determined]
BY AND BETWEEN THE CITIES OF MONTEREY, PACIFIC GROVE, SEASIDE AND CARMEL-BY-THE-SEA
THIS JOINT EXERCISE OF POWERS AGREEMENT (“Agreement”), is made and entered into as of the ____ day of ______________, 2010 by and between the City of Monterey, a charter city, the City of Pacific Grove, a charter city, the City of Seaside, a general law city, and the City of Carmel-by-the-Sea, a charter city, each duly organized and existing in the County of Monterey, State of California under the constitution and laws of the State of California (individually or collectively referred to as “Member” or “Members”).
W I T N E S S E T H:
WHEREAS, each of the Members has authority for the provision of fire protection services within its respective jurisdiction; and
WHEREAS, the jurisdictional areas of the Members are contiguous to each other, are developed to substantially the same level of density, and are susceptible to the provision of fire protection services and facilities under common administration and management and with the same or similar equipment, resources, and personnel; and
WHEREAS, the Members recognize the advantages and efficiencies of consolidating each Member’s individual fire service resources into a single regional fire service agency to improve effectiveness through standardization and shared resources, and to enhance fiscal responsibility by eliminating duplication and achieving efficiencies through the operation and governance of a Joint Powers Authority (“JPA” or “Authority”); and
WHEREAS, the separate management and administration of fire services in each jurisdictional area by each of the respective Members, using separate equipment, resources, and personnel have resulted in duplication of effort, multiple administrations, and additional costs, which, in the judgment of the Members, could be eliminated, to the substantial advantage and benefit of the citizens and taxpayers of the Members, if the administration and management of the fire protection facilities and services employing common equipment, resources, and personnel were to be consolidated in a single public entity; and
WHEREAS, combining the management and administration of the Members as well as the equipment, resources, and personnel, can reduce costs and also lead to a higher level and quality of service; and
WHEREAS, the Joint Exercise of Powers Act (Government Code Section 6500 et seq. “the Act”) provides that two or more public Members may by agreement jointly exercise any powers common to the parties to the agreement and may by that agreement create an entity that is separate from the parties to the agreement; and
WHEREAS, members of a JPA have availed themselves of the right under Government Code Section 6508.1 to specify in the joint powers agreement that the liabilities of the JPA are not the liabilities of its Members; and
WHEREAS, the various Members have already demonstrated their ability to achieve service enhancements and efficiencies by contracting with each other, jointly training and providing services, and otherwise achieving functional consolidation in a wide variety of service areas; and
WHEREAS, the ongoing and increasing fiscal pressures on all Members make it imperative that they seek and take advantage of every conceivable opportunity to improve the cost-effectiveness of their services; and
WHEREAS, as a result of lengthy negotiations, the Members recognize the benefits of combining their respective fire service providers into one provider, and all desire to receive their fire services from a JPA; and
WHEREAS, the Members envision that the JPA will evolve to include other municipal services as opportunities for improved services and cost effectiveness arise.
WHEREAS, the governing board of each Member has determined it to be in the Member’s best interest and in the public interest that this Agreement be executed and that it is a participating Member of the this JPA; and
WHEREAS, by this Agreement, the Members desire to create and establish a JPA to provide the structure for this consolidation, and to enable the initial phase of the consolidation to be implemented, set forth terms and conditions governing the management, operation, and financing of what will be called the [name to be determined] and to exercise the powers described herein and as provided by law; and such is the purpose of this Agreement;
NOW, THEREFORE, in consideration of the mutual promises and covenants contained herein, the Members hereto agree as follows:
ARTICLE I
DEFINITIONS
Section 1.1. Definitions.
For purposes of this Agreement, the following words shall have the following meanings.
“Act” means the Joint Exercise of Powers Act of the State of California, California Government Code Sections 6500 et seq., as it now exists or may hereafter be amended.
“Agreement” means this Joint Exercise of Powers Agreement.
“Authority” means the [name to be determined], the joint powers authority or JPA established by this Agreement as authorized by Government Code Section 6503.5.
“Board of Directors” or “Board” means the governing body of the Authority.
“Bonds” means bonds, notes or other obligations of the Authority issued pursuant to any provision of law which may be used by the Authority for the authorization and issuance of bonds, notes or other obligations.
“Bond interest and redemption expenses” means those sums of money required to be expended by the Authority from any bond interest and redemption fund to be established and maintained by the Authority for the payment of principal of and interest on bonds (if any) issued pursuant to this Agreement.
“Bond Law” means Article 2 of the Act, as now or hereafter amended, or any other law hereafter legally available for use by the Authority in the authorization and issuance of bonds to finance needed public facilities or services.
“County” means the County of Monterey, State of California.
“Fire Chief” means a person designated by the Board to plan, direct, manage, and oversee the activities and operations of the Authority including, but not necessarily limited to, fire suppression, hazardous material mitigation, fire and life safety code compliance and administrative support services.
“Fiscal Year” means the period from July 1st to and including the following June 30th, or such other period as the Board may specify by resolution.
“Finance Director” means the Finance Director of the Authority designated pursuant to Section 4.8 of this Agreement.
“Inception period” means the five-year period from the effective date of this Agreement.
“Joint Facilities” means all existing fire protection facilities, equipment, resources and property to be managed and operated by the Authority pursuant to Sections 2.2, 2.3, 4.16, and 5.4 hereof, (as particularly set forth in Exhibit “B” hereto attached and made a part hereof by reference) and, if and when acquired or constructed, any improvements and additions thereto and any additional facilities or property acquired or constructed by the Authority or the Members.
“Operation and Maintenance Costs” means those sums of money required to be expended by the Authority from a fund to be established and maintained by the Authority to finance the cost of maintaining and operating the Joint Facilities subject to the provisions of Section 4.16, including all administrative and management costs and all costs of maintaining equipment, resources and property and all personnel costs incurred after July 1, 2010, but excluding all capital costs and all costs of special services.
“Measure” or “Measures” means a revenue measure proposed by the Authority or two or more revenue measures proposed by each of the Members to assist the Members in funding their financial obligations to the Authority under this Agreement. If two or more revenue measures are proposed, “Success of the Measure” shall mean successful approval of all measures.
“Members” and “Member.” “Members” means the parties to this Agreement and “Member” means one such Member.
“Operating Fund” is defined in Section 5.4 of this Agreement.
“Secretary” means the secretary of the Authority designated pursuant to Section 4.7 of this Agreement.
“Service Area” means the combined aggregate jurisdictional service areas of the Members as they now exist and as they may hereafter be modified by annexation of territory to or exclusion of territory from the boundaries of any of the Members. The combined aggregate service areas of the Members as they now exist are delineated on the map attached hereto as Exhibit “A” and hereby made a part of this Agreement.
“State” means the State of California.
“Treasurer” means the Treasurer of the Authority designated pursuant to Section 4.8 of this Agreement.
ARTICLE II
GENERAL PROVISIONS
Section 2.1 Creation of [name to be determined].
(a) Pursuant to Section 6503.5 of the Act, the Members hereby create a public entity separate and independent from the Members hereto, hereafter to be known as the “[name to be determined],” pursuant to the terms and conditions set forth in this Agreement.
(b) Within 30 days after the effective date of this Agreement and after any amendment, the Authority shall cause a notice of such Agreement or amendment to be prepared and filed with the office of the California Secretary of State containing the information required by California Government Code Section 6503.5.
(c) Within 10 days after the effective date of this Agreement, the Authority shall cause a statement of the information concerning the Authority, required by California Government Code Section 53051, to be filed with the office of the California Secretary of State and with the County Clerk, amending and clarifying the facts required to be stated pursuant to subdivision (a) of Government Code Section 53051.
Section 2.2 Purpose.
The purpose of the Authority is to improve effectiveness of fire service through standardization, uniform adoption of best practices, and shared capabilities that one jurisdiction could not afford or otherwise provide, and to enhance fiscal responsibility by eliminating duplication of capabilities, through the governance of a Joint Powers Authority. In furtherance of this purpose, the Authority shall exercise the common powers of the Members to manage, operate, and maintain the Joint Facilities and to implement the financing, acquiring and constructing of additions and improvements to the Joint Facilities to provide the Area with efficient and economical fire protection services, and, if necessary, to issue and repay Bonds of the Authority. The Authority’s purpose is not to determine if, when, or how any of its Members approve development within their respective jurisdictions. Each of the Members is authorized to exercise all such powers (except the power to issue and repay revenue Bonds of the Authority) pursuant to its organic law and the Authority is authorized to issue and provide for the repayment of Bonds pursuant to the provisions of the Bond Law or other applicable law.
Section 2.3 Ownership of Joint Facilities.
Each Member shall continue to own that portion of the Joint Facilities now owned by each, respectively.
Section 2.4 Effective Date.
This Agreement shall be effective as of July 1, 2010.
Section 2.5 Term.
The term of this Agreement is 10 years.
ARTICLE III
POWERS AND OBLIGATIONS OF THE AUTHORITY
Section 3.1 General Powers.
The Authority shall have the power in its own name to exercise any and all common powers of its Members reasonably related to the purposes of the Authority, including but not limited to, the powers to:
(a) Seek, receive and administer funding from any available public or private source, including grants or loans under any federal, state and local programs for assistance in achieving the purposes of the Authority;
(b) Contract for the services of engineers, attorneys, planners, financial and other necessary consultants;
(c) Contract for supply, maintenance, and repair of Joint Facilities, vehicles, equipment, resources, and property and pay all Operation and Maintenance costs;
(d) Make and enter into any other contracts;
(e) Employ agents, officers and employees;
(f) Acquire, lease, construct, own, manage, maintain, operate, or dispose of (subject to the limitations herein) any buildings, works, or improvements;
(g) Acquire, hold manage, maintain, or dispose of any other real or personal property by any lawful means, including without limitation gift, purchase, eminent domain, lease, leasepurchase, license, or sale;
(h) Incur all authorized debts, liabilities, and obligations, including issuance and sale of bonds, notes, certificates of participation, bonds authorized pursuant to the Marks-Roos Local Bond Pooling Act of 1985, California Government Code Sections 6584 et seq. (as it now exists or may hereafter be amended), or any other legal authority common to the Members and such other evidences of indebtedness, subject to the limitations herein;
(i) Receive gifts, contributions, and donations or property, funds, services, and other forms of financial or other assistance from any persons, firms, corporations, or governmental entities, or any source;
(j) Sue and be sued in its own name and to take any or all legal or equitable actions, including but not limited to injunction and specific performance, necessary or permitted by law to enforce this Agreement;
(k) Seek the adoption or defeat of any federal, state, or local legislation or regulation necessary or desirable to accomplish the stated purposes and objectives of the Authority;
(l) Adopt rules, regulations, policies, bylaws, and procedures governing the operation of the Authority;
(m) To invest any money in the treasury pursuant to California Government Code Section 6505.5 that is not required for the immediate necessities of the Authority, as the Authority determines is advisable, in the same manner and upon the same conditions as local Members, pursuant to Section 53601 of the California Government Code as it now exists or may hereafter be amended;
(n) Carry out and enforce all the provisions of this Agreement, and have other powers necessary and proper to carry out the purposes of this Agreement;
(o) Exercise all other powers not specifically mentioned herein, but common to the Members and authorized by California Government Code Section 6508 as it now exists or may hereafter be amended; and
(p) Assign, delegate or contract with a Member or third party to perform any of the duties of the Board.
Section 3.2 Specific Powers and Obligations.
(a) Audit. The records and accounts of the Authority shall be audited annually by an independent certified public accountant, as provided in Section 4.8(d).
(b) Securities. The Authority may use any statutory power available to it under the Act and any other applicable laws of the State of California, whether heretofore or hereinafter enacted or amended, for issuance and sale of any revenue bonds or other evidences of indebtedness necessary or desirable to finance the exercise of any power of the Authority, and may borrow from any source including, without limitation, the federal government, for these purposes.
(c) Liabilities. The debts, liabilities or obligations, whether contractual or noncontractual, of the Authority shall be debts, liabilities or obligations of the Authority alone, and not the debts, liabilities and obligations of the Members. (Gov. Code § 6508.1).
(d) Hold Harmless and Indemnification. To the fullest extent permitted by law, the Authority agrees to save, indemnify, defend and hold harmless each Member from any liability, claims, suits, actions, arbitration proceedings, administrative proceedings, regulatory proceedings, losses, expenses or costs of any kind, whether actual, alleged or threatened, including attorney’s fees and costs, court costs, interest, defense costs, and expert witness fees, where the same arise out of, or are in any way attributable in whole or in part, to negligent acts or omissions of the Authority or its employees, officers or agents or the employees, officers or agents of any Member while acting within the course and scope of an Member relationship with the Authority.
(e) Manner of Exercise. For purposes of California Government Code Section 6509, the powers of the Authority shall be exercised subject to the restrictions upon the manner of exercising such powers as are imposed upon the City of Monterey.
(f) Review of Agreement. This Agreement shall be reviewed at a minimum every four years by the members, in order to consider amendments and other proposals; its terms and conditions may be reviewed more frequently whenever the Board agrees to do so.
Section 3.3 Withdrawal from Authority.
(a) Notice. A Member shall provide two years’ written notice to withdraw from the Authority, provided that withdrawals shall not be allowed during the initial five-year period from the effective date of the Agreement (the “inception period”).
(b) Any member withdrawing from the JPA shall be obligated to pay the Authority for the estimated Authority liability for any leave balances its former employees transferred to the Authority and for its share of any other Authority liabilities, including but not limited to Workers Compensation.
Section 3.4 Dissolution of Authority.
(a) Notice. The Authority shall dissolve, and its assets be distributed in accordance with the provisions of this Agreement, upon written notice by the Board of its intention to dissolve the Authority, provided that such notice shall be given 24 months prior to the date of dissolution.
(b) Distribution of Funds and Property. If the Board gives notice of its intent to dissolve the Authority pursuant to Section 3.4(a) above, any remaining funds, property or other assets of the Authority, following discharge of all debts, liabilities and obligations of the Authority, shall be distributed to the Members. The formula used to pay off any remaining unfunded liabilities at the time of dissolution, as well as to divide the assets, shall be the average of the annual funding formulas that have been in effect from July 1, 2010, through the fiscal year in which notice of intent to dissolve the Authority is given. The Members acknowledge that the real property used by the Authority as of the effective date of this Agreement is owned by the Members and will not be distributed according to this formula, but shall remain vested in the Member which owns each parcel. Notwithstanding the provisions of Government Code Section 6512, any remaining funds shall be distributed in accordance with the provisions of this paragraph.
(c) Distribution of Assets Acquired by Authority. Upon termination of this
Agreement, any assets acquired by the Authority during the period of its existence and still on hand shall be distributed to the Members in the manner to be determined by mutual agreement at the time of termination on the basis of appraised value at the time of termination and in accordance with the allocation formula which was in effect at the time of acquisition. The Board shall appoint any needed appraisers, and the cost of such appraisals shall be liabilities of the Authority.
ARTICLE IV
ORGANIZATION, GOVERNANCE AND FUNCTIONS OF AUTHORITY
Section 4.1 Governing Board.
(a) The Board shall govern the Authority in accordance with this Agreement and shall have one Board Member per Member. The policy-making body of each Member shall appoint a Board Member to serve for a term of two years, although a Board Member may be removed during his or her term or reappointed for multiple terms at the pleasure of the Member that appointed him or her. The Board Member so appointed shall be a voting member of the Member’s respective policy-making body or the city manager or equivalent of the Member or a department head of the Member.
(b) All voting power of the Authority shall reside in the Board.
(c) Each Board Member shall cease to be a member of the Board when such Board Member ceases to hold office on the legislative body of the Member that appointed him or her or to be the city manager or equivalent of the Member or to be a department head of the Member. Vacancies shall be filled by the respective appointing Members.
(d) The policy-making body of each Member may appoint one alternate member of the Board who shall serve in the absence of the Board member representing the Member for whom the alternate is appointed. Alternates, who shall be voting members of the Member’s respective policy-making body or the city manager or equivalent of the Member or a Department Head of the Member, shall have no voting power other than when serving for an absent Board member.
(e) The policy-making body of each Member shall also appoint a member to an
Administrative Committee to provide advice to the Board. Members of this Administrative Committee shall serve at the pleasure of the Member that appointed him or her, and vacancies shall be filled by the respective appointing Members.
Section 4.2 Compensation and Expense Reimbursement.
Board members shall not receive a stipend. Each Board member shall be reimbursed for reasonable and necessary expenses actually incurred in the conduct of the Authority’s business, pursuant to an expense reimbursement policy established by the Board in full accordance with all applicable statutory requirements.
Section 4.3 Voting.
All actions of the Board shall require the vote of at least a majority Board of members present and voting. Board members may not cast proxy or absentee votes. Each member shall have an equal vote.
Section 4.4 Weighted Vote.
Actions of the Board shall be by consensus, affirmation, or majority vote of those Board members present with each agency having one vote, unless a weighted vote is requested by any two Board members. In a weighted vote, the weighting would be based on the formula used to allocate shared resource costs among the member agencies. A Board action on a weighted vote requires both a majority of weighted votes and a simple majority vote. The weighted vote issue can be revisited if the JPA Board members represent the entire JPA service area rather than their individual jurisdictions.
Section 4.5 Conflicts of Interest.
(a) Political Reform Act. Board Members shall be considered “public officials” within the meaning of the Political Reform Act of 1974, as amended, and its regulations, for purposes of financial disclosure, conflict of interest and other requirements of such Act and regulations, subject to a contrary opinion or written advice of the California Fair Political Practices Commission. The Authority shall adopt a conflicts of interest code in compliance with the Political Reform Act.
(b) Levine Act. Board Members are “officials” within the meaning of California Government Code Section 84308 et seq., commonly known as the “Levine Act,” and subject to the restrictions of such act on the acceptance, solicitation or direction of contributions.
Section 4.6 Board Meetings.
(a) Time and Place. The Board shall meet at the principal office of the Authority or at such other place designated by the Board if notice is provided in the manner of notice of an adjourned meeting under the Ralph M. Brown Act, California Government Code Section 54950 et seq., The time and place of regular meetings of the Board shall be designated by resolution adopted by the Board, a copy of which shall be furnished to each Member at least 10 days prior to the next such regular meeting.
(b) Call and Conduct. All meetings of the Board shall be called and conducted in accordance with the provisions of the Ralph M. Brown Act and other applicable law. Board meetings shall be conducted also in accordance with such procedures as shall be adopted by the Board by resolution.
(c) Quorum. The Board members representing a majority of Members and a majority of the population in the service area shall constitute a quorum of the Board required to conduct the business of the Authority.
(d) Rules. The Board may adopt from time to time such bylaws, rules and regulations for the affairs of the Authority as are consistent with this Agreement and other applicable law.
(e) Minutes. The Secretary shall cause draft action minutes of all meetings of the Board to be drafted and mailed to each Member promptly after each meeting. Upon approval by the Board, such minutes shall become a part of the official records of the Authority. Section 4.7 Officers.
(a) The Board shall elect a Chair and Vice-Chair from among its members, and shall appoint a Secretary who may, but need not, be a member of the Board. The Chair and Vice-Chair shall serve a term of one year or such other period of time as may be designated in rules or bylaws established by the Board. The officers shall perform the duties normal to said offices, as described below.
(b) Chair. The Chair shall preside over all meetings of the Board and shall sign all contracts on behalf of the Authority, except contracts that the Board may authorize the Fire Chief or another officer, agent, or employee of the Authority to sign. The Chair shall perform such other duties as may be imposed by the Board in accordance with law and this Agreement.
(c) Vice-Chair. The Vice-Chair shall act, sign contracts and perform all of the Chair’s duties in the absence of the Chair.
(d) Secretary. The Secretary shall countersign contracts signed on behalf of the Authority, and shall be the official custodian of all records of the Authority. The Secretary shall attend to such filings as required by applicable law. The Secretary shall perform such other duties as may be imposed by the Board.
Section 4.8 Finance Director and Treasurer.
(a) The ________________ is hereby initially designated as the Finance Director and Treasurer of the Authority. The Board may appoint other persons possessing the qualifications set forth in Government Code Section 6505.5 to either or both of these offices. The Authority shall contract with the person or Member whose employee is appointed as the Finance Director and Treasurer of the Authority. The person or Member providing these services shall give the Authority six months’ written notice of its intention to cease providing these services.
(b) The Treasurer shall be the depositary and shall have custody of all of the accounts, funds and money of the Authority from whatever source. The Finance Director and the Treasurer shall perform the duties and functions and shall assume the obligations and authority set forth in Sections 6505 and 6505.5 of the Act.
(c) The Financial Director and Treasurer shall receive, invest, and disburse funds only in accord with procedures established by the Board and in conformity with applicable law.
(d) Annual Audits and Audit Reports. The Financial Director/Treasurer shall cause an annual financial audit to be made by an independent certified public accountant with respect to all JPA receipts, disbursements, other transactions and entries into the books. A report of the financial audit will be filed as a public record with each Member. The audit will be filed no later than required by State law. The Authority shall pay the cost of the financial audit and charge the cost against the Members in the same manner as other administrative costs.
(e) The Finance Director and Treasurer shall secure a fidelity bond. Section 4.9 Legal Advisor. The Board shall appoint a Legal Advisor for the Authority who shall provide legal advice and such other services as may be prescribed by the Board. Subject to such provisions of the Rules of Professional Conduct and other law as may apply, the City Attorney or their equivalent of one of the Members may serve as Legal Advisor for the Authority.
Section 4.10 Fire Chief.
The Board shall hire, evaluate, and terminate the Fire Chief, who shall be chief executive officer of the Authority and shall report to the Board. The Board may delegate the hiring, evaluating, and terminating of the Fire Chief to an Executive Committee comprising some or all of the City Managers or equivalent executive positions of the Members. The Fire Chief shall have the power to hire, evaluate, and discharge all subordinate employees of the Authority.
Section 4.11 Additional Required Services.
a. Finance, Human Resources and IT. The Authority shall initially contract with _________for finance, purchasing, risk management, information technology, and human resources services. These services shall be evaluated during each review of this Agreement as provided for in Section 3.2(f), or when directed by the Board.
Upon any such review, any Member may submit a proposal for the Board’s
consideration and, if none do so, the Board may contract with another qualified public entity to provide those services. A Member providing these services shall give the Authority and the other Members six months’ written notice of its intention to cease providing these services.
b. Equipment Maintenance. The Authority shall initially contract with ____________ for equipment maintenance of the Authority’s vehicles.
Section 4.12 Additional Officers and Consultants.
The Board may appoint additional officers deemed necessary or desirable. Such additional officers also may be officers or employees of a Member or of the Authority. The Board may also retain such other consultants or independent contractors as may be deemed necessary or appropriate to carry out the purposes of this Agreement.
Section 4.13 Bonding Requirements.
The officers or persons designated to have charge of, handle, or have access to any funds or property of the Authority shall be so designated and empowered by the Board. Each such officer or person may be required to file an official bond with the Authority in an amount established by the Board. Should existing bond or bonds of any such officer or persons be extended to cover the obligations provided herein, said bond shall be the official bond required herein. The premiums on any such bond attributable to the coverage required herein shall be appropriate expenses of the Authority. If it is prudent to do so, the Authority may procure a blanket bond on behalf of all such officers and persons.
Section 4.14 Status of Officers and Employees.
All of the privileges and immunities from liability, exemption from laws, ordinances and rules, all pension, relief, disability, worker’s compensation, and other benefits which apply to the activities of officers, agents or employees of the Authority when performing their respective functions within the territorial limits of a Member shall apply to them to the same degree and extent while engaged in the performance of any of their functions and duties under the provisions of this Agreement and Chapter 5 of Division 7 of Title 1 of the California Government Code, commencing with Section 6500. However, none of the officers, agents or employees appointed by the Board shall be deemed to be employed by any of the Members or to be subject to any of the requirements of such Members by reason of their employment by the Authority.
Section 4.15 Committees.
The Board may create standing and ad hoc committees to give advice to the Board of Directors on such matters as may be referred to such committees by the Board. Qualified persons shall be appointed to such committees by the Board and each such appointee shall serve at the pleasure of the Board. All regular, adjourned and special meetings of such committees shall be called and conducted in accordance with the applicable requirements of the Ralph M. Brown Act, Government Code Sections 54950 et seq., as it now exists or may hereafter be amended, and all other applicable law.
Section 4.16 Initial and Subsequent Phases of JPA
(a) The initial phase (“First Phase”) of the JPA will be for Fire Chief services.
(b) The Second Phase of the JPA will include headquarters Fire functions. These headquarters functions shall include, but not be limited to, Fire Administration, Fire Training, Fire Prevention, and the Duty Chief component of Fire Operations.
(c) The Third Phase of the JPA will be for full Fire services, including the remainder of Fire Operations, specifically the fire engine companies, ladder truck companies, and relief firefighters, as determined by the Board.
(d) As soon as practical after the effective date of the JPA, the First Phase of the JPA shall be implemented. The timing and manner of the implementation of the Second Phase and the Third Phase of the JPA shall be determined by the Board.
ARTICLE V
OPERATIONS AND FACILITIES
Section 5.1 Principal Office.
(a) The Principal Office of the Authority shall initially be the current office maintained by Monterey Fire Department in the City of Monterey. The Authority may establish another principal office from time to time by resolution of the Board.
(b) The Authority shall initially lease space for its Principal Office from Monterey. This lease shall be evaluated during each review of this Agreement as provided for in Section 3.2(f), or when directed by the Board. Upon any such review, any Member may submit a proposal for the Board’s consideration and, if no Member does so, the Board may arrange to lease space from another landlord. A Member providing space shall give the Authority and the other Members 6 months' written notice of its intention to cease providing that space.
Section 5.2 Assumption of Responsibilities by the Authority.
As soon as practicable after the effective date of this Agreement, the Members shall appoint their representatives to the Board and the City Managers or their equivalents shall jointly give notice of an organizational meeting of the Board. At said meeting the Board shall provide for its regular meetings, shall elect a Chair and Vice-Chair, and shall appoint a Secretary as prescribed in Article IV. The Fire Chief shall give notice of an organization meeting of the Board annually thereafter.
Section 5.3 Delegation of Powers; Transfer of Records, Accounts, Funds, and
Property.
Subject to the provisions of Section 4.16, each of the members hereby delegates to the Authority the power and duty to maintain, operate, manage and control all of the fire protection facilities, equipment, resources and property of each of the respective Members within their territorial jurisdiction, as well as those a Member or the Authority may acquire in the future, including without limitation all fire stations, land, buildings and fire-fighting equipment, and to employ the necessary personnel and to do any and all other things necessary or desirable to provide continued, efficient, and economical fire protection services to the Area. The facilities managed by the Authority as provided in this paragraph constitute the Joint Facilities.
Section 5.4 Joint Fire Protection Operations and Maintenance Fund; Reserves and Capital.
The Authority shall create a joint fire protection operations and maintenance fund (herein called the “Operating Fund”). Upon the organization of the Board, the Authority shall maintain the Operating Fund and shall pay all personnel, contractual and administrative expenses of the Authority. Each of the Members shall pay into that fund its share of these costs of the Authority as set forth in Article VI of this Agreement. The Authority shall establish reasonable reserves as approved by the Members via annual budgets.
Subject to the provisions of Section 4.16, initially the Members intend for each Member to pay for the costs of owning, maintaining, repairing and replacing the fire stations and the fire apparatus in the stations and specified equipment and supplies for the fire stations and fire apparatus in the Member’s jurisdiction. Any Member who does not have a fire station in its jurisdiction will pay a portion of the costs of the stations and apparatus of the Members that have stations and apparatus, in accordance with budget policies adopted by the Board.
Section 5.5 Existing Scope of Joint Facilities and Services.
Upon commencement of this Agreement, each Member shall have fire stations within its jurisdiction with an engine company at each location. Subject to the provisions of Section 4.16, changes in the number of stations and the provision of staffing and fire safety services at each station shall be determined by the Board and specified in the annual budget.
ARTICLE VI
BUDGET: FUNDING FORMULA AND OTHER FINANCIAL PROVISIONS
Section 6.1 Annual Budget.
The Authority shall adopt an annual budget for each fiscal year. No expenditures may be made by or on behalf of the Authority unless authorized by a budget or budget amendment.
Section 6.2 Funding Formula.
Subject to the provisions of Section 4.16, the Authority’s command, administrative, and administrative overhead costs will be considered shared resources, and these costs will be
allocated among the member jurisdictions according to a shared resources cost allocation formula. These costs will include Fire Department management (e.g. Fire Chief, Assistant Fire Chief, Division/ Battalion Chiefs), fire prevention staff, fire training staff, and fire administrative analyst and/or fire administrative assistant support staff, as well as their supplies and services, equipment, vehicles, and office space. Subject to the Third Phase of the JPA provisions of Section 4.16, these costs will also include probationary fire academy training costs for new firefighters prior to their being assigned to an engine company, and relief firefighters. The shared resources costs will also include administrative overhead costs such as human resources, finance, risk management, it, and legal costs. In the Third Phase of the JPA, the shared resources may include line staff and/or other staff as determined by the Board.
The shared resources cost allocation formula is based on three factors, weighted separately. The three factors are: population, number of incidents (rolling three-year average), and minimum daily line staff in each Member jurisdiction and any jurisdiction for which the Member provides contractual fire service. The population and minimum daily line staff factors will be weighted equally, and the number of incidents (rolling three-year average) will be weighted twice as heavily as each of the other two factors. The shared resources cost allocation formula percentages for each Member will be updated by the Board annually, as well as any time a Member joins or leaves the Authority.
Starting in the Second Phase of the JPA as provided in Section 4.16, fire prevention fees shall be retained by the JPA and allocated among its member agencies according to the shared resources cost allocation formula.
Section 6.3 Allocation of Expenses.
After the Board approves submission of an annual budget to the Members, the Fire Chief shall forward that budget to each Member, along with his or her calculation of the share to be borne by each Member under the formula stated in Section 6.2 above. Approval of the budget by the Board shall also constitute approval of the allocation of the budget cost as calculated by the Fire Chief.
Section 6.4 Expenditures within Approved Annual Budget.
All expenditures within the limitations of the approved annual budget shall be made in accordance with the rules, policies, and procedures adopted by the Board.
Section 6.5 Disbursements.
Warrants shall be drawn upon the approval and written order of the Board and the Board shall requisition the payment of funds only upon approval of claims, disbursements and other requisitions for payment in accordance with the Agreement and other rules, regulations, policies and procedures adopted by the Board.
Section 6.6 Accounts.
All funds will be placed in the Operating Fund and the receipt, transfer, or disbursement of such funds by the Controller and the Treasurer shall be accounted for in accordance with the generally accepted accounting principles applicable to governmental entities, with strict accountability of all funds. All revenues, expenditures and status of bank accounts and investments shall be reported to the Board as frequently as the Board shall direct and, in any event, not less than annually, pursuant to procedures established by the Board.
Section 6.7 Establishment and Administration of Funds.
(a) The Authority is responsible for the strict accountability for all funds and reporting of all receipts and disbursements. It shall comply with every provision of law relating to the establishment and administration of funds, particularly Government Code Section 6505.
(b) All funds shall be accounted for on a full accrual basis.
ARTICLE VII
DISPUTE RESOLUTION
Section 7.1 Good Faith Negotiations.
The Members acknowledge that differences between them and among the Board
Members may arise from time to time and agree to make good faith efforts to resolve any such differences by means of good faith negotiations among the Members or Board Members, as the case may be. If such negotiations do not resolve a dispute, and no Member gives a notice to dissolve the Authority, as provided in this Agreement, then the Members shall resolve disputes in any manner permitted by law or in equity.
ARTICLE VIII
EMPLOYEE RELATIONS
Section 8.1 Employee Relations.
The Board shall maintain as necessary Employer-Employee Relations Procedures and Personnel Rules and Regulations applicable to the Authority. The Board may amend either or both items without referring the items to the Members.
Section 8.2 Annual Budget Issues.
In conjunction with the annual budget process described above, the Board shall consider the following: cost allocation plan, service goals, service performance standards, and labor relations agreements or memoranda of understanding (“MOU”), unless a multi-year MOU is in place.
Section 8.3 Bargaining.
Bargaining under the Meyers-Milias-Brown Act shall proceed as set forth in this section. Employees of the Authority are not employees of any Member. The Board and staff negotiators shall negotiate with the representatives of the Authority’s employees. After tentative agreement has been reached by the negotiating team and the representatives of the Authority’s employees, the Board shall act on the agreement.
ARTICLE IX
MISCELLANEOUS
Section 9.1 Amendments.
This Agreement may be amended by an affirmative vote of the governing bodies of all of the Members, acting through their governing bodies. A proposed Amendment must be submitted to each Member at least 30 days in advance of the date when the Member will consider it. An Amendment is effective immediately unless otherwise designated.
Section 9.2 Notice.
Any notice required to be given or delivered by any provision of this Agreement shall be personally delivered or deposited in the U.S. Mail, registered or certified, postage prepaid, addressed to the Members at their addresses as reflected in the records of the Authority, and shall be deemed to have been received by the member to which the same is addressed upon the earlier of receipt or 72 hours after mailing.
Section 9.3 Attorney’s Fees.
In the event litigation or other proceeding is required to enforce or interpret any provision of this Agreement, the prevailing Member in such litigation or other proceeding shall be entitled to an award of its actual and reasonable attorney’s fees, costs and expenses incurred in the proceeding.
Section 9.4 Successors.
The Agreement shall be binding upon and inure to the benefit of any successor of a Member.
Section 9.5 Assignment and Delegation.
No Member may assign any rights or delegate any duties under this Agreement without the unanimous written consent of all other Members and any attempt to make such an assignment shall be null and void for all purposes. No creditor, assignee, or third party beneficiary of a Member has a right, claim, or title to any part, share, interest, fund, or asset of the Authority. However, nothing in this Section prevents the Board from assigning any interest or right it may have under this Agreement to a third party.
Section 9.6 Counterparts.
This Agreement may be executed in one or more counterparts, all of which together shall constitute a single agreement, and each of which shall be an original for all purposes.
Section 9.7 Severability.
Should any part, term or provision of this Agreement be decided by any court of competent jurisdiction to be illegal or in conflict with any applicable law, or otherwise rendered unenforceable or ineffectual, the validity of the remaining parts, terms, or provisions of this Agreement shall not be affected thereby and to that end the parts, terms and provisions of this Agreement are severable.
Section 9.8 Integration.
This Agreement represents the full and entire Agreement among the Members with respect to the matters covered herein, and includes and incorporates by reference Exhibits A and B attached hereto.
Section 9.9 Parties to Agreement.
Each Member certifies that it intends to, and does, contract with every other Member which is a signatory to this Agreement and, in addition, with such other Member as may be later added as Members. Each Member also certifies that the deletion of any Member from this Agreement does not affect this Agreement or each remaining Member’s intent to contract with other Members then remaining.
Section 9.10 New Members.
All Members admitted after January 1, 2011 are New Members. A public entity may be admitted as a New Member only upon a two-thirds (2/3) vote of the Board and upon complying with all other requirements established by the Board and the Bylaws. Each applicant for membership as a New Member must pay all fees and expenses, if any, set by the Board.
Section 9.11 Liability Limits.
Subject to limitations thereon contained in any trust agreement or other documents pursuant to which Authority financing may implement, funds of the Authority may be used to defend, indemnify, and hold harmless the Authority, any Member, any Board Member or alternate, or any employee or officer of the Authority for their actions taken within the scope of their duties while acting on behalf of the Authority.
Section 9.12 Execution.
The legislative bodies of the members have each authorized execution of this Agreement, as evidenced by their respective signatures attested below.
CITY OF CARMEL-BY-THE-SEA
_______________________________
Mayor
Attest
_______________________________
City Clerk
Approved as to form
_____________________________
City Attorney
CITY OF MONTEREY
_______________________________
Mayor
Attest
_______________________________
City Clerk
Approved as to form
_____________________________
City Attorney
CITY OF PACIFIC GROVE
_______________________________
Mayor
Attest
_______________________________
City Clerk
Approved as to form
_____________________________
City Attorney
CITY OF SEASIDE
_______________________________
Mayor
Attest
_______________________________
City Clerk
Approved as to form
_____________________________
City Attorney
EXHIBITS
EXHIBIT A [Section 1.1]
MAP OF COMBINED, AGGREGATE SERVICE AREAS OF MEMBERS
EXHIBIT B [Section 1.1]
LIST OF EXISTING “JOINT FACILITIES”
NOTE: The signatory parties to the Draft Joint Powers Agreement are the four cities of Carmel-by-the-Sea, Monterey, Pacific Grove and Seaside; the cities of Sand City and Del Rey Oaks are not signatories at this time because Sand City and Del Rey Oaks have decided to continue as contractees, that is Sand City contracts with the City of Monterey and Del Rey Oaks contracts with the City of Seaside.
Source: CITY OF PACIFIC GROVE
300 Forest Avenue, Pacific Grove, California 93950
AGENDA REPORT
TO: Honorable Mayor and Members of the City Council
FROM: Thomas Frutchey, City Manager
MEETING DATE: May 5, 2010
SUBJECT: Selection of Preferred Option for Future Fire Services
CEQA: Does not Constitute a “Project” under California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA) Guidelines
Pages 43-66
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)