Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAbout1999-10-04 City Council (6)City City of Palo Alto Manager’s Report 6 TO:HONORABLE CITY COUNCIL FROM:CITY MANAGER DEPARTMENT: FIRE DATE:OCTOBER 4, 1999 CMR: 371:99 SUBJECT:SIXTH AMENDMENT TO AGREEMENT WITH SANTA CLARA COUNTY FOR ABATEMENT OF WEEDS RECOMMENDATION Staff recommends that Council authorize the Mayor to enter into an agreement which would provide for the City ofPalo Alto’s continued participation in the Santa Clara (County) weed abatement program. BACKGROUND The City of Palo Alto has been party to an agreement with Santa Clara County since 1977 regarding the abatement of weeds. The County program is directed to be fully cost- recoverable by its governing bodies. In 1996, the County increased the fees for weed abatement contract services. This was the first increase since 1983 (CMR 485:96). At that time, the County indicated it plans to continually review weed abatement fees in order to monitor the cost-recovery effort. The County no longer has available reserve funds for the program, which previously had been used to subsidize the increased costs of the program. It must meet any increases in the costs to execute and administer the program through necessary fee adjustments. Program revenues and expenses for the County are outlined in Attachment C. DISCUSSION It is proposed by the County to increase the administrative fees for the program to 140 percent for the 1999-2000 weed abatement season. This is an increase of 10 percent from the 130 percent level set in 1998. Approval of this proposal and endorsement of the amendment would continue the availability of weed abatement services from the County for those property owners choosing to use them. The increased costs for the administration of the program are discussed in the letter from the County (attached). Due to Council vacation, the County granted an extension for the City Council to approve this agreement. CMR 371:99 Page 1 of 2 RESOURCE IMPACT The average increase for cost per parcel from 1998 for property owners would be approximately $15 in Palo Alto, bringing the average cost per parcel to approximately $349. (see Attachment B). The option to contract independently for weed abatement services will remain the same for the residents and City of Palo Alto. The estimated increase in annual fees charged to the City of Palo Alto will be $2,870 which is a 7.7 percent increase. ENVIRONMENTAL REVIEW A Negative Declaration for the project has been completed and is found exempt from the provisions of the California Environmental Quality Act ("CEQA"), because it can be seen with certainty that there is no possibility that the project will have a significant effect on the environment. ATTACHMENTS Letter from the County of Santa Clara re: Proposed Amendment to Adjust Weed Abatement Program fees Attachment A: Sixth Amendment to the Agreement between Santa Clara County and the City of Palo Alto for Abatement of Weeds Attachment B: Palo Alto Jurisdictional Summary Attachment C: County-wide Summary Prepared By: Dan Heiser, Fire Marshal Department Head Review: City Manager Approval: EMI HARRISON Assistant City Manager CMR 371:99 Page 2 of 2 County of Santa Clara Envirol-wncl-~tal Resources Age~cy Fir~.TM Marshal’s Office - Santa Clara County Fire Department County Gov~rnm~nt Center, East wing 70 ~sl Hedding Street, 7th Floor San Jose. California 9511 ~ 1705 (408) 299-3805 FAX 279-8537 July 20, 1999 Mr. Dan Heiser Fire Marshal Palo Alto Fire Department City of Palo Alto 250 Hamilton Ave. Palo Alto, CA 94301 Re: Proposed Amendment to Adjust Hazardous Vegetation Management Program Fees Dear Mr. Heiser, For the past twenty years Santa Clara County has provided hazardous vegetation management services to local jurisdictions in order to address the issue of public fire safety in a cost effective manner. Since then, we have been fortunate to create partnerships with twelve jurisdictions to provide timely weed and brush abatement services and thereby reduce fire danger. The economy of scale employed by this Program and our efforts to keep administrative costs to a minimum have allowed us to continue to provide these services to your residents at minimal cost. We are committed to minimizing costs, but at the same time we must ensure cost recovery of the Hazardous Vegetation Management Program as directed by the Santa Clara County Board of Supervisors. Begiqning with the start of the 1999/2000 weed abatement season in September 1999 we propose to raise our Hazardous Vegetation Management Program fees from 130% to 140% of the weed abatement contract costs. The proposed County administrative cost increase will equate to an average increase of only 4.35% or $14.53 per parcel in your jurisdiction. This increase will cover the rising costs of Program administration anticipated for FY00 due to the negotiated labor union contract costs recently approved by the Santa Clara County Board of Supervisors which includes salary and benefit increases. A proposed amendment to our agreement for weed abatement services is provided in Attachment A. The proper~y owner would only incur costs if they choose not to maintain their property according to the minimum fire safety standards and the County provides weed abatement services. In keeping with the procedures of the current Program, if a property owner provides their own abatement, they are not assessed a fee for our inspection services. For your reference we have provided Attachment B that summarizes the number of parcels inspected, number of parcels abated and the average cost per parcel including Program fees for weed abatement services in your jurisdiction for the 96/97 and 97/98 seasons. Attachment C provides an accounting of the Hazardous Vegetation Management Program on a county-wide Board of Supervisors: Donald E Gage. Blanca Alvarado. Pete McHugh, James T. Beall Jr.. S. Joseph Simitian ~)County Executive: Rlci~ard Wittenberg ~ o~- basis for the same period of time. Even with the proposed fee adjustment, we believe the benefits realized by the economy of scale still allow our services to be competitive. Please let us know if we can provide any assistance as you carry the amendment forward to your City Councils for approval. Considering our desire to provide uninterrupted service, we suggest the approval process by your Council and our Board of Supervisors be completed this summer. Please return a signed amendment to my attention by September 1, 1999. If you do not wish to continue contracting with the County for weed abatement services, we would appreciate being notified of your decision by August 4, 1999 so that we may inform our Board of Supervisors and make any necessary adjustments to the Hazardous Vegetation Management Program. We anticipate our Board will take action on the amendments August 17, 1999. If you have questions, please don’t hesitate to contact me at (408) 299-3805 ~xt. 207. We thank you for your support will look forward to working with you. Since ~ly,,, ~, .. ~..-"Sr. Deputy Fire Marshal Attachments Attachment A: ,Attachment B: Attachment C: Proposed Amendment Jurisdictional Summary County-wide Summary Richard Wittenberg, County Executive Paul D. Romero, Director Peter Ng, Financial and Administrative Services Manager Lauren Harvey, Sr. Management Analyst Attachment A Proposed Amendment SIXTH AMENDMENT TO THE AGREEMENT BETWEEN SANTA CLARA COUNTY AND THE CITY OF PALO ALTO FOR ABATEMENT OF WEEDS The Agreement for the Abatement of Weeds (Agreement) between the County of Santa Clara (County) and the City of Palo Alto (City) previously entered into on April 18, 1977, as amended on November 5, 1979, November 20, 1981, February 15, 1983, January 14, 1997 and August 18, 1998 is hereby amended to increase the charge for the County’s program costs to administer the Hazardous Vegetation Management Program. IT IS AGREED between the parties as follows: 1.Statement of Costs Section 6. of the Agreement shall be amended to read as follows: County shall render to City an itemized statement or report of the cost of the weed abatement services performed for the respective parcels of land in the City on or before the 10th day of August of each year, which shall include the County’s administrative costs of 140 % of the cost of the weed abatement contractor for the respective parcels for which services were performed. The statement shall include the description of the lots and parcels of land for which services were performed, and verification by signature of the County official administering the Hazardous Vegetation Management Program. Charges for services performed on parcels owned by the City will include a reduced administrative fee of 70% of the cost of the weed abatement contractor. o Duration of Agreement Section 13. of the Agreement shall be amended to read as follows: The Agreement became effective on the date of execution and shall run until the governing body of the City or the County shall exercise the right to terminate this Agreement as of the 1st day of September of any year, by giving notice to the other party not less than 10 days prior to the date of termination. The increased charge for the County’s administration costs shall be effective commencing with the Fiscal Year 2000 weed abatement season. Except as modified herein, all other terms and conditions of the Agreement remain the same. SANTA CLARA COUNTY CITY OF PALO ALTO Paul Do Romero, Director Environmental Resources Agency August 17, 1999 Approved as to form and legality: James E. Lewis, Deputy County Counsel Date Attachment B Palo Alto Jurisdictional Summary 96/97 Season 97/98 Season Parcels Inspected 440 538 Parcels Abated 58 88 Avg. Cost/Parcel $218 $334 including Program fee Note:The 98/99 season data is not yet completed. The proposed County administrative cost increase to 140% of the cost of the weed abatement contractor equates to an effective 4.35% increase in the average cost per parcel. Using the 97/98 season’s average cost per parcel, the 4.35% increase would equate to an increase per parcel of $14.53 in the 98/99 season. Attachment C County-wide Summary FY 97 FY 98 FY 99 Actuals Actuals Estimated Beginning Balance ($53,449)($57,866)($53,840) Revenues Expenditures: Staffing General Interest 497,162 379,315 428,983 Subtotal Program Administration Contract Abatement 180,607 138,356 *129,864 * 48,237 23,350 28,473 20,412 22,902 20,000 249,256 184,608 178,337 252,323 190,681 206,362 501,579 375,289 384,699 Surplus (Deficit)(4,417)4,026 44,284 Ending Balance (57,866)(53,840)(9,556) Both FY98 and FY99 staffing costs are artificially low due to salary savings from vacancies due to turnovers and medical leave.