Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAbout1981/09/22 - Agenda Packet - AdjournedI N �,! JOINT MEETING WITH FOOTHILL FIRE DISTRICT BOARD OF DIRECTORS September 22, 1981 -- 7:00 p.m. Lion's Park Community Center 9161 Base Line Road (An Adjourned City Council Meeting) 1. CALL TO ORDER. A. Pledge of Allegiance. B. Roil Cali: Council Members: Phillip Schlosser, Mayor`' James Frost Jon Mikels" Michael Palombo- Arthur Bridge, Fire District Board Members: Bill Alexander, President ✓ John Lyons; "Pete" Amodt Daniel Richards ✓' Ronald Spiers, Jr. Ik 2. DISCUSSION ITEMS. A. Recruitment Process for Fire Chief. B. Continuation of Discussion of Fire Protection Feasibility Study. The City Attorney, City Manager, and Fire Chief are available to respond to any questions which may have arisen since the last joint meeting of the Fire District Board and the City Council on November 18, 1980. 3. ADJOURNMENT. 1. CALL TO ORDER An adjourned joint meeting of the City Council of the City of Rancho Cucamonga with the Foothill Fire District Board was held on Tuesday, September 22, 1981, in the Lion's Park Community Center. The meeting was called to order by Mayor Phillip D. Schlosser at 7:02 p.m. Present were: Councilmembers James C. Frost, Jon D. Mikels, Michael A. Palombo, Arthur H. Bridge, and Mayor Phillip D. Schlosser. Board members: John Lyons, "Pete" Amodt, Daniel Richards, and President Bill Alexander. Staff members: City Manager, Lauren M. Wasserman; Fire Chief, Bob Lee; Assistant City Attorney, Robert Dougherty; and Deputy City Clerk, Beverly Authelet. Absen^ was: Board members Ronald Spiers, Jr 2. DISCUSSION ITEMS. 2A. RECRUITMENT PROCESS FOR FIRE CHIEF Mayor Schlosser turned the meeting over to President of the Foothill Fire District Board, Bill Alexander. Mr. Alexander stated that Chief Lee would be retiring soon. Because of this, the Board felt that there should be some participation by the City during the selection process of the new Chief since he would be working with the city staff, and since there was the possibility the city would be taking over the fire district some time in the future. Mr. Alexander asked Chief Lee to bring everyone up -to -date on the selection process. Chief Lee said the Board had secured the services of CPS, the State Cooperative Personnel Services out of Los Angeles. It is a State agency to conduct the examining process called an Assessment Center Process. The Assessment Center is scheduled to be held on October 22. Applications are now being received and will be screened by a Board of Professionals. About 10 to 15 candidates will be referred to the Assessment Center Process. Candidates will be put through several stages of an examining process, and a slate of about four candidates will be presented to the Board of Directors for final consideration. It is hoped this will be accomplished by early November and the new chief will be on board by December 1. This will give the Chief about a month to work with the new man before he leaves. Iodate, CPS has responded to about 38 requests for applications. President Alexander said that the Board was reasonably up -to -date, but asked if Council had any questions. Councilman Mikels asked if the Assessment Center is where candidates went through exercises of real life situations and reactions were charted under various conditions. Chief Lee said this was correct and it took a full day. Mr. Alexander said they were trying to base the test around not only what the community is today, but to the long -range growth potential of the community. They are looking for someone who is progressive and has the ability to work with people. .1 September 17, 1981. He emphasized the following points. 1. Were there any new alternatives to consider? The answer was no. There were only two alternatives: (1) leave the district as a self - governed independent Board, or (2) become a subsidiary district of the city. At the last discussion, both the Council and Board concurred :hat if any change occurred, it would be at the time when the city had its regional shopping center. There would be enough sales tax generated to support the services at a somewhat higher level. 2. Has anything changed since then? The only change is that there is a new chief coming on board. There are some who feel the schedule should be accelerated so the new chief could begin a transition to the city. 3. Finances. We have discovered the Fire District is losing some of the augmentation fund, "bail out funds." What is happening is that money raised by the Fire District assessed value and formula set by State legislation is not all being forwarded to the District. The County keeps some and the rest is out into a pot and is portioned out to all special districts on a need basis. Last year the District received $651,000. There was another $170,000 in revenue which was generated by the District, but not received by the District. Reliable sources from the County say that if the District were to become a subsidiary district of the city that all such augmentation funds would automatically come to the city. Although we are not sure what the figure would be for this year, it is probably safe to say there would be at least another $100,000 that is being filtered off to other special districts. Mr. Wasserman stated that one problem with this is that Sacramento could change the rules at any time. With the State facing financial problems, it can be expected that there would be some cuts in assistance programs. However, they are usually not in public safety areas. 4. Management Issues: A new chief coming would have the opportunity of becoming a part of the city team and to work on long -range planning. There is existing city staff available to help relieve the Chief of some of the finacial burdens and personnel functions. Mr. Wasserman turned the meeting over to City Attorney, Robert Dougherty, to give his report on procedures for formation of a subsidiary district. Mr. Dougherty stated that he had nothing to add from his written report except that in order form a subsidiary, at least 70% of the assessable or taxible land must be within the city. He said he felt we could meet this requirement. There was also a population requirement which was not a problem at all. Councilman Mikels asked if a separate special district and a subsidiary district of a local government were treated any differently under the law. Mr. Dougherty said they were treated precisely the same. According to Government Code Section 56539, "Such district shall continue in existence with all of the powers, rights, duties, obligations and functions provided for by the principal act, except for any provision relating to the selection or removal of the members of the board of directors of such district." a .lity to 1. y additional funds tnrougi the Ltate or County might decrease with the thought that the city might be able to provide for those resources. Mr. Doughertv said he could not answer that question. However, the city would not be assuming the obligation as a city to provide fire services. As far as funding is concerned when a subsidiary district is formed, terms and conditions can be attached to that formation. One of the conditions we would want to see included in the Resolution of Application is that the subsidiary district receives all funds allocated to it without deductions from it as has happened in the past. Councilman Frost said it was his understanding that this last year the fire district was able to dip into the funding by requesting additional equipment that otherwise would not have been received. Wouldn't it be possible that in any given year, if you could provide a need, you could receive in excess of the 100% funding? Mr. Alexander said there were different opinions on the Board regarding that. However, for this particular year, the district did better than expected. Dan Richards said you are talking about bail -out augmentation monies which probably will be reduced in the next year and possibly not available in two years. We are not talking about long -range financing. He said he feels they got the money because they asked for it. He felt we should continue asking and justify- ing expenditures. Mr. Dougherty stated that we have not been able to come on with anything to show that the subsidiary district would be guaranteed full funding. This would be up to the County. He understood a precedent has been set with Big Bear Lake, but there is nothing to require the County to handle this situation the same. Councilman Bridge asked Mr. Wasserman to clarify the terms used: bail -out funds and funds generated by the district. Mr. Wasserman stated that the amount of bail -out (State assistance) is done by formula. What can be determined is bow much the district can generate by using a formula based upon assessed value and some other factors. There are not two separate types of funds. Mr. Dougherty stated that in the apportionment of property tax, it is done by a fairly complex formula. The 1% property tax is divided up by the County by a formula. In the case of a special district, the part of what they are allocated on a gross basis if funds are available is not ball -out funds; it is tax apportionment money. There is no guarantee that this amount would be reallocated to the subsidiary district unless the County agrees to this. Mr. Amodt asked if it were up to the Board of Supervisors how much money a subsidiary district would be allocated. Mr. Dougherty stated that by State law the district continues in existence then these funds can be agreed upon to go to the subsidiary district. However, there is nothing in State law that requires this to be done simply because a subsidiary district is created. Mr. Wasserman said that we had a commitment made on the staff level that based upon the precedence set in Big Bear, the County would follow the same thing for Rancho Cucamonga and the Foothill Fire District. Mr. Alexander said he thought a precedence had been set in Vi ^torville also, Thev are currently a subsidiary district and have enjoyed considerably more in the last three years. Councilman Mikels questioned if the Board of Supervisors could bind subsequent Boards to an 100% reallocation to the subsidiary district. Mr. Dougherty stated that the only way would to have that provision as a condition of the creation of the subsidiary district. The Board can commit a future Board, but can a later Board reverse the action? We would argue onto because it was part of the action of the formation. However, if this were simply an agreement made apart from the process and not a condition of the formation of the subsidiary district, then the Board could change it. necessary actions, if feasible, to form the subsidiary district to be governed by the city council. (Chief Lee said that Captain Michael was speaking for the Rancho Cucamonga Profession fire Fighters Association and not for all the department). Mr. Wasserman said that should we decide to proceed with the formation of the subsidiary district, this changeover would not occur until the beginning :. the new fiscal year, July 1982. Jeff Sceranka asked if the funds which the County gets -- is this independent of the bailout money? Mr. Wasserman said they were the same. The District receives some funds as a portion of the property tax as does the city. In addition they get through a complicated formula State augmentation funds which are called bailout funds. This amount goes into a pot, and the Board establishes a need of all the special districts and doles it out based upon need. Jeff Sceranka asked how the formation of a subsidiary district would effect the allocations of tax funding to the city since we are forming a redevelopment agency. Mr. Wasserman said this would not adverselyaf feet this because we have to negotiate tax increments. Rick Label, former member of the Foothill Fire Board. He expressed that the formation of the subsidiary district would benefit members of the community. He said he has been asked if his interest was because of the uncoming new chief's position. He stated he was not intere'sed in the position, but was interested in the fire protection of the community. Mayor Schlosser asked for the Board's and Council's position. He said personally he was here to listen and learn. Councilman Mikels said he was concerned about the agreement, but since assurances were built in that we would not lose the funding to the County and even might be able to recapture some additional revenues for the District. he saw some advantages. He suggested that after further discusstion tonight that if the Board wanted to discuss this at their own Board meeting and pass such a resolution and forward it to the City Council then the City Council could then take action and file such an application. Councilman Bridge said he had no reluctance in stating his position that he favored the creation of a subsidiary district and thought it would be worthwhile pursuing. Councilman Frost stated that we were not in a position to give a definite "yes" now. Mr. Ed. Barnes. He requested a copy of the statements which were read ear]ier in the meeting by the city attorney. He felt a lot more time should be spent investi- gating this, and that the Council and Board had not done their homework. Mayor Schlosser replied that the Council had made it clear that if they received a resolution from the fire board, the Council would take it under consideration and study it. He assured Mr. Barnes that the Council will do their homework. Richard Nelson. He expressed that he hoped we would Proceed with the formation of the subsidiary district. Dan Richards. He felt we had not taken a good look at this. He urged Council to ask themselves if they expected to improve the levels of service which we currently have and will there be a noticable funding difference. And, could the Council assume the extra time involved -- their board now meets regularly once a month for several hours. less a nensxveLy per capita Der man per square mile than neighboring city fire departments -- could this be con- tinued under the city. Pete Amodt expressed that he was in favor of the creation of the subsidiary district. He felt it was right for the city to take over the management of the fire district. John Lyon expressed that as a member of the Personnel Committee be felt that we should talk about personnel. He said we continually get feedback from the State that we are going to lose revenues. The same feedback comes from the County. He said we talk about layoffs, closing stations all of which has a detrimental effect on the firemen and the fire service. He felt that the city take over would eliminate much of this. Mr. Alexander summarized some of the advantages which had been mentioned before: increase of funding, more local control, provide a fire chief who could function as a fire chief. He also stated that they hoped they could take advantage of the city attorney at least in some form of consultation. Mr. Alexander stated he had talked with the fire chief in Victorville. He said that situation as a subsidiary district is working out tremendously well. In answer to Mr. Barnes, he said they have been studying this for a year now. Regarding funding -- you will save funds when you give a man the ability to do his ' y g job and not pay him to do another person's job. Operating on less funds per capita -- whether we like it or not, we are also providing less service than most other communities. Councilman Frost asked Mr. Label for his comments of anything which he felt had not been discussed. Mr. La Belle stated that the greatest benefit he has heard regarding the development of a subsidiary district would be in the operational efficiency of the fire district in terms of community services. One governing board which would deal with all of its community services can do a better service to its citizens. Mayor Schlosser said that Councilman Mikels had expressed the concensus of the Council and that nothing further could be accomplished tonight. He asked if there was anyone else wishing to address the issue. There was no response. Mr. Alexander said that he knew the climate of the Fire Board and the City Council could expect a resolution from the Board shortly. He thanked the Mayor and Council for the opportunity to meet with them. 3. ADJOURNMENT Motion: Moved by Mikels, seconded by Palombo and speaking in behalf of the City Council and Board to adjourn the meeting. Council to adjourn to an executive session, not to reconvene this evening to discuss pending litigation. The meeting adjourned at 8:30 p.m. Respectfully submitted, Beverly Authelet Deputy City Clerk CITY OF RANCHO CUCAMONGA STAFF REPORT September 17, 1981 TO: City Council and Fire District Board of Directors FROM: Lauren M. Wasserman City Manager SUBJECT: Fire Protection Feasibility Study - Added Comments ;977 The City Council and Board of Directors of the Fire District may recall in December 1980 a detailed report was prepared at your request outlining the organizational alternatives available for the Fire District. As you may recall, at that time the funding for the District was uncertain. Since that time, there have been many new issues which have surfaced. Some unfounded and some which can be verified. The purpose of this memorandum is to outline in summary form those issues. 92a iiWi_on' Alternatives. It appears at this writing that the only feasible alternatives available to continue providing fire services for Rancho Cucamonga are to retain the existing arrangement whereby the Foothill Fire Protection District remains as a self - governed special district with its own elected board of directors; or, to reorganize the District in accordance with the District Reorganiztion Act and create a subsidiary district. The effect of this alternative is that the policy- making authority for the District would transfer from the Board of Directors to the City Council. Funding for the Fire Protection District would differ somewhat. However, that difference will be outlined later in this memo. The City Attorney will be in attendance to outline in some detail the organizational alternatives available and to respond to questions members of the Board or City Council may have. 2. Timing of Any C�ha�nye�s, You may recall that when last discussed it was the consensus of both 1 6 icy making boards that any transition of fire district responsibilities from the special district to the city should best occur at the time the regional shopping center opens and the city begins receiving substantial sales tax revenues. It appears as though the circumstances have not changed significantly since the issue was last discussed, One exception, however, is the pending retire- ment of Chief Lee and the recruitment of his successor. There has been some discussion in the community that perhaps the reorganization of the District should occur at the same time the new chief begins his tenure in Rancho Cucamonga, Naturally, that is a policy decision, and no staff recommendation City Council Board of Directors RE: Fire Protection Feasibility Study September 17, 1981 Page 2 is proposed. 3. Finances. Since the issue was last discussed, we have had an opportunity to work with County to determine precisely what amount of bail -out or special augmentation funding would be lost or gained as a result of any change in the status of the Foothill Fire Protection District. The County has indicated that if the city were to assume responsibility for fire protection by forming a subsidiary district, all of the special augmenta- tion funds which are generated would come directly to the city. Based on last year's revenues, this would represent an increase of approximately $170,000 per year which would be available to support fire protection services. Under the present system, special augmentation funds come to the County and are distributed on a "need" basis. A portion of the funds which are generated by the Foothill Fire District are retained and distri- buted to various County districts on a need basis. At this time it is not possible to accurately determine the precise revenues which would be available to the Foothill Fire District if the transition occurs. However, the County staff has indicated that the dollar figures would be approximately the same as last year with increases to reflect the added assessed valuation which has occurred within the last year. County staff has also indicated that the precedent has been set for any district changes from an independent district to a subsidiary district to receive the entire amount of funding without having to justify the additional need. While it is clear that the formation of a subsidiary district would result in greater revenues for fire protection services, it is important that the City Council and the Board of Directors recognize the possibility that State legislation could be enacted which could change completely the financing mechanism for fire services. While it is doubtful that this action will occur since fire services are generally considered essential, there is always a possibility that legislators in Sacramento may somewhat arbitrarily change the rules for financial assistance at any time without prior notice to the city. While it is clear that fire services are deemed essential, there still is the remote possibility that some funding could be lost as a result of changes in the State law. 4. Management Considerations. From the city manager's view point there are both negative and positive factors which must be evaluated if any change in the status of the Foothill Fire Protection District is planned. The new chief when he or she is ultimately selected, may be in a position to work closely with the city manager and city council regarding long -range plans for fire protection services. While this alternative is not precluded if the district remains independent, it is somewhat more difficult to accomplish. A second factor which must be considered an advantage is that the city staff is now available, particularly the finance department staff, to City Council Board of Directors RE: Fire Protection Feasibility Study September 17, 1981 Page 3 provide assistance in handling the financial affairs of the fire district. This would not require additional personnel at this time. The prime benefit would be that the chief would be more readily available to handle the fire management responsibilities without spending a great deal of time on the financial aspects of the fire protection functions. The city personnel department could handle recruitment activities for the fire district. This would also leave the chief more time to handle more critical personnel issues. It would appear there are philisophical differences regarding the advantages or disadvantages of eliminating an independent special district board and substituting the policy making authority of the city council. The staff does not intend to evaluate whether an independently elected board with only one area of responsibility can provide more effective leadership and policy determination than a city council which is responsible for all of the primary policies which effect the long -range development of the city. That is a matter which is best left for discussion by the respective elected repre- sentatives. This memorandum is not intended to comprehensively deal with all of the issues related to the fire district and city. It is, however, an attempt to highlight the major issues which have been discussed in the community since the last joint meeting of the two agencies. Staff will be available to add additional information or to respond to questions if the city council and board of directors wish. CITY OF RANCHO CUCAMONGA MEMORANDUM December 15, 1980 1977 TO: City Council and Board of Directors, Foothill Fire Protection District FROM: Lauren M. Wasserman City Manager SUBJECT: Information for City Fire Protection Feasibility Study In addition to the comments offered by Chief Robert Lee, the following information is presented for your consideration: Organizational Alternatives In order to retain fire services in the community of Rancho Cucamonga, it appears that there are essentially three alterna- tive methods available; they are as follows: Retain the existing arrangement whereby the Foothill Fire Protection District remains as a self- governed special district with its own elected board of directors. Reorganize the District in accordance with the District Reorganization Act and create a subsidiary district. The effect of this alternative is that the Board of Directors is eliminated and the City Council assumes overall policy direction, control, and responsibility for fire protection services. Funding for the Fire District would not change significantly if the District is operated as a subsidiary special district. Dissolve the Foothill Fire Protection District and transfer all personnel and assets to the City of Rancho Cucamonga. if the Fire District is dissolved, the District would be treated in the same manner as any other city department. This would be true in both policy and budgetary matters. It should be noted, however, that some contractual arrange- ment would have to be established in order to provide fire protection services to territory which is within the Foot- hill Fire Protection District boundaries, but outside the current City limits. Fire Feasibility Memo December 15, 1980 Page 2 In the event the Board of Directors of the Fire District and the City Council of Rancho Cucamonga agree that no change be made at this time, the District will operate as it has in the past. However, if the City Council and Fire District Board of Directors agree that the formation of a subsidiary fire district is appro- priate, that action may be initiated by the adoption of a Resolution of Application by the City Council in accordance with Government Code Section 56195. The Resolution is then trans- mitted to the executive officer of the Local Agency Formation Commission. After notice and hearing, the LAFC may either approve or disapprove the proposed reorganization. If the proposal is not approved, no further action may be taken on the plan and no new proposal for the same or substantially the same change organization may be filed for a period of one year (Government Code Section 56273). However, if the proposal to reorganize and form a subsidiary district is approved by the LAFC, further proceedings are conducted by the Board of Supervisors. In the course of these proceedings, the Board may order an election to require voter concurrence with the proposal. While the formation of the subsidiary district may appear to be complicated, it is in fact a fairly routine procedure, particularly in the case of a city which proposes to assume control of a fire district. Within the past year, the Board of Supervisors has suggested that this procedure be considered. I1. Political Considerations It appears as though there are a number of issues which must be resolved before any action is taken either by the Foothill Fire Protection District or the City. From a City standpoint, it appears to make sense from a long -range point of view that fire protection services be under the direct supervision and control of the City Council. However, if any changes are made in the present arrangement, it must be clearly evident beforehand that the change will result in improved levels of service or in improved policy direction than that which is presently being provided. III. Funding Alternatives If the City were to assume any involvement in the affairs of the Foothill Fire Protection District, it is anticipated that community pressure would grow to use a portion of current or futur-, city revenues to assist the Fire District in providing services. At the prco.:::t -ime, both agencies remain separate and funding for both agencies is not inter- mingled. However, if a subsidiary district were formed, it would be possible from a legal standpoint to use city general fund revenues to augment a portion of the Fire District operations. Fire Feasibility Study December 15, 1980 Page 3 At the present time the Foothill Fire Protection District receives special district augmentation funds from the State. These funds are also referred to as "bail out" funds. In a report prepared by the Local Agency Formation Commission approximately one year ago, the LAFC indicated that if the Foothill Fire Protection District were to be established as a subsidiary district, negotiations relating to distribution of the special district augmentation funds will be elimina- ted because distribution of funds to support city subsidiary districts come directly to cities from the State. unfortunately, there appears to be conflicting information as to whether or not the City would receive additional bail -out funding if the fire district were operated as a subsidiary district of the The whole issue involving bail -out assistance may be oo in that it appears as though State surpluses have dwindle considerably and may not be available during the next budget year. On the other hand, it may be virtually impossible for the State legislature to ignore the needs of special districts which provide life - support services. If the City Council and the Board of Directors of the Foothill Fire Protection District feel that at some point the Fire District should be transferred to the City, it is important to consider the timing of that change. At the present time, existing revenue available to the City is being used to pro- vide what we consider to be a minimum program of service. Any use of funds for providing fire protection services would, of course, correspondingly reduce the amount of revenue avail- able to finance other essential City services. This community has a serious deficit, particulary with streets, flood control facilities, and parks. One of the more important future sources of revenue still being considered is the construction of a regional shopping center. The City receives one percent of all sales tax collected. At the time the regional shopping center opens (assuming that the center is developed as planned), the City may then be in a better financial posi- tion to assume control over fire service activities. it is anticipated that when opened, the regional shopping center will generate between two and three million dollars per year in additional general fund revenues to the City. These funds may be used at the discretion of the City Council so long as all expenditures are in accordance with the Proposition 4 spending limitation. Fire Feasibility Study becember 15, 1980 Page 4 IV. Summary Comments It is the view of the city staff that at the present time there appears no significant advantage to the City be- coming involved in fire protection services. The City does not now have the funding available to increase levels of service to a desirable level which is essential in order to keep up with the growth we have experienced in the past and will continue to experience in the future. If, how- ever, it is agreed that at some point in the future the City should become involved in providing fire protection services, the timing of that involvement should, in so far as possible, coincide with the opening of the regional shopping center. For at that time the City may be better able to absorb the additional costs which will be necessary to increase fire protection service levels in Rancho Cucamonga. LMW:baa attach. FOOTHILL FIRE PROTECTION DISTRICT MEMORANDUM TO: BOARD OF DIRECTORS /CITY COUNCIL FEASIBILITY STUDY COMMITTEE FROM: ROBERT A. LEE, FIRE CHIEF SUBJECT: INFORMATION FOR CITY FIRE. PROTECTION FEASIBILITY STUDY DATE: DECEMBER 11, 1980 Fire District Financial Information Adopted Budgets 1977 -80 1977 -78 $1,716,206 1978 -79 $1,537,507 1979 -80 $1T6;9Q99. ' 1980 -81 S1,679,297 1980 -81 Budget: Salaries and Benefits $1,350,611 Services 6 Supplies 222,440 Debt Redemption 6 Interest on Notes 44,746 Capital Outlav (Equipment) 9,000 Reserves: Contingency Reserve 10,000 Equipment Replacement 42 500 1,679,297 Revenue (Estimates) for 1980 -81 Property Taxes (All) $ 822,698 1, Augmentation Fund 651,853 3' - - Interest 10,000 1979 -80 Cash Balance 187,712 Other 7,034 Since Proposition 13, trying to estimate revenue has been extremely difficult. We only recently received the latest revised estimate of property tax revenue which appears above. It is about $2,000 Board of Directors /City Council December 11, 1980 Page Two less than the next most recent one. The County's estimates have been consistently low in the past two years; hopefully, they will be again this year. Revenues for the District are predominantly property taxes and state augmentation funds. This year, the cash balance carryover from last year was $187,712. This is considerably higher than anticipated and is not likely to be repeated this year. A portion of the carryover was the equipment reserve which, until tapped this year for $7,500, was $50,000. This is pre- Proposition 13 money. Personnel Salaries and Benefits for 1980 -81: Salaries Total $1,037,479 P.E.R.S3 Retirement 156,883 Medical 5 Denta14 Group Insura ce 71,257 Workers' Compensation Insurance 84 992 Total: $1,350,,61.1 1. Salaries include base salaries, overtime, nay for reserve firefighters and extra help. 2. Retirement is P.E.R.S., 28 at 50 program for 33 "safety" personnel and 28 at 60 for 3 non - safety personnel. Final compensation is based upon highest 3 -year average. 3. The District Contracts through P.E.R.S. for medical insurance under the Public Employees' Hospital and Care Act (Meyers- Geddes). The District pays 1008 of the insurance premium for employees, annuitants, and dependents. 4. Dental care premiums are also 1006 paid by the District through two different private plans. 5. The District participates in the "Fire Agency Self - Insurance System ", a joint powers agency of five independent fire protection districts in the county. The system is adminis- tered by Self Insurance Administrators, Incorporated, of San Diego. Funds are paid into an account held by the County Auditor - Controller. Claims and expenses are paid by county warrant against this trust account. District Total Assessed Values: 1979: $299,008,610 1980: $338,951,165 (up 13.368) Board of Directors /City Council December 11, 1980 Page Three Property Tax and Augmentation History: Property Tax Augmentation 1977 -78 $1,458,113 Hone 1978 -79 $ 645,087 (Down 55.88) $513,281 1979 -80 $ 740,625 (Up 14.88) $644,913 (Up 25.78) 1980 -81 $ 822,698 (Up 11.14) $651,853 (Up 1.14) Augmentation allocations have apparently been based upon a "no growth" policy with the 1978 -79 year as base. Each year, District budgets have been reviewed by County staff and aummentation funds allocated on the basis of their evaluation. They anparently follow some guidelines established by the County Administrator, but these guidelines have never been communicated to the Districts, either before or after budget preparation. The new County Administrator, Mr. Bob Rigney, assumed his position "midstream" in the allocation process this year, and the system seemed to work a little better. I understand that he is studying the process with the idea of modifying it for the 1981 -82 fiscal year with some improvement in mind. We anticipate that about 504 of our revenue for 1981 -82 will have to come from augmentation funds - unless we can develop an alternative source. On Thursday, December 11, I contacted the Chief Assistant County Administrator, Mr. Lynn Kerkhofer (Mr. Rigney was in Sacramento), and asked three questions which are Pertinent to this feasibility study. The questions and answers were as follows: Q: If the City should form a subsidiary District, would augmentation funds be affected? A: A share of augmentation money would be taken from the augmentation fund prior to the allocation to non - subsidiary districts and be qiven to the City. This is the way Victor - ville receives its augmentation money, and Big Bear Lake will be treated similarly this year, since they have in- cornorated and formed a subsidiary district. Q: If the District is successful in an election to establish "standby and availability" charges, will we still get our fair share of augmentation money? A: We are in the process of reviewing the augmentation system. The election nay not affect the allocation system, but the "politics of the thing" might. Board of Directors /City Council December 11, 1980 Page Four Q: What consideration, if any, has the County given to Fire District subsidy if augmentation funds should be severely reduced or eliminated due to insufficient state revenue? A: We must provide fire Protection in the county. We are optimistic about augmentation funds for fire nrotection. Fire districts will be funded somehow. We feel that all fire districts will have to attempt the election, such as we understand you are going to do. We will be following your election very closely. Note: At this time, the Board of Directors has not yet made a vision concerning the election. Please note that the answers above are not verbatim quotations, but are accurate reflections of the conversation. Current Level of Fire Protection service: The District is now providing service from three fire stations, one in each of the communities of Alta Loma, Cucamonga and Etiwanda. Two of the stations (Alta Loma and Cucamonga) are Poorly located for optimum service and will probably have to be relocated in the future. The Etiwanda station is temporary, consisting of a single -wide mobile home and a metal Butler building for housing the engine. It is located on land belonging to the County Flood Control District, for which we pay a token lease payment of one dollar ($1.00) per month. it is not intended to serve as a permanent station and it, too, will have to be relocated in the near future. The three stations house one engine company each, with a minimum manning level of three men on each engine around the clock. Thus, we have nine firemen and one chief officer (who responds from home) to provide fire protection for the entire 53 square mile district. All other personnel are subject to emergencv recall, as are the reserve firefighters. The District employs 35 full time personnel. There are 27 fire suppression personnel (assigned to the stations), one non -fire- fighter inspector, one Deputy Fire Marshal, three Battalion Chiefs, one Fire Equipment Mechanic, two clerical personnel and one Fire Chief. The reserve firefighter program has an authorized strength of 18 persons, who are called in for major emergencies. Board of Directors /City Council December 11, 1980 Page Five Initial response to residential structure fires consists of two engines and a chief officer for a total of 7 personnel. If the fire turns out to be a "worker ", it is usually necessary to call in the third engine. In some areas of the District, a third engine automatically responds from Ontario or Upland to assist in accordance with formal automatic aid agreements. The arrangement is reciprocal. Initial response to commercial and industrial properties consists of all three engines, one chief officer, and the fourth engine from Ontario or Upland, within certain areas. "Working" industrial, commercial and wildland fires usually result in our calling for additional mutual aid assistance, plus the recall of our off -duty people to man our two reserve engines. Emergency medical service response consists of one engine company and a private paramedic ambulance. The duty Fire Chief carries the Hurst rescue tool in his car and responds as needed. The fire prevention services are under the direction of a Battalion Chief /Fire Marshal. He is assisted by a Deputy Fire Marshal and one inspector. There is another authorized inspector position which is now vacant because of inability to fund that position. The fire department plan checks for all development in the District are performed almost exclusively by the Denuty Fire Marshal, who usually is swamped with work. We are looking into ways to solve this problem. The Fire Inspector has her hands full dealing with commercial, industrial, public assembly and institutional inspections, as well as performing other required duties. The engine companies do the required routine commercial and industrial insnections under the direction of the Fire Marshal. The District's personnel strength has not changed during the oast four years, except to add one Battalion Chief position and a Fire Equipment Mechanic. The mechanic more than pays for his salary by doing repairs and maintenance that we used to have sent out to com- mercial repair shops. The District's four chief officers provide round -the -clock command and administrative duties, as well as specific administrative assign- ments such as Operations Officer, Training Officer and Fire Marshal. The District is seriously deficient in manpower. We should be able to provide an initial response to residential fires of at least ten .(10) men and a chief officer. we come close to that goal by adding the outside mutual aid company in some areas of the District Board of Directors /City Council December 11, 1980 Page Six but, in the bulk of the residential areas, we are four (4) men short of that goal. In order to provide adequate fire protection to the District, we should now have four engine companies and one truck company in service, and add personnel to the Fire Prevention Bureau. Were it not for Proposition 13, we would have accomplished that by now. Because of inadequate revenue, we have had to shelve plans to provide the additional men and apparatus. We were forced to use funds set aside for fire station site purchases for operating expenses in the first year following Proposition 13. Under present fundina, we can hope for no more than to hold on to what we now have. With the prospect of even greater development in the immediate future, and with our very limited ability to expand services to provide the fire protection needed, it is obvious that something must be done to provide "non - traditional" sources of funding. Respectfully submitted, � Robert A. Lee, £ire Chief RAL:va