Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAbout09/21/1999, 4 - EXPENDITURE OF STATE PUBLIC SAFETY GRANT FUNDS Council M..wvDae�'G/— j, acenaa izepoM „4N CITY O F SAN LUIS O B I S P O FROM: James M. Gardiner,Chief of Policert", Prepared By: Kathe Bishop, Administrative Secretary SUBJECT: EXPENDITURE OF STATE PUBLIC SAFETY GRANT FUNDS CAO RECOMMENDATION Adopt a resolution approving an expenditure of$95,153 from the 1999-00 State budget grant to fund the salary and benefits for a Field Services Technician position and to assist in funding the Mobile Data Computers project as recommended by the Chief of Police. DISCUSSION Under the provisions of a three year bill - AB 1584, the State is providing grant funds to law enforcement agencies. This is the third year of funding under AB 1584- a three year bill. The State grant funds for fiscal year 1999-00 total$95,153. During the first year of AB 1584, Police Department staff reviewed the current and projected needs of the organization. A plan was developed which included a blending of both the Federal and State funds over a period of three years. This plan was reviewed and given approval by the City Council in February 1998. Aspart of the City's 1999-01 budget process, the 1999-00 State grant funds were appropriated for the second year of salary and benefits for a Field Services Technician position at a cost of approximately $52,000 and the balance of approximately $43,000, combined with Federal grant funds and City funds, is allocated for a capital improvement plan to fund the Mobile Data Computer (MDC) program. The MDC program is a project to put fully interactive computer systems in our patrol vehicles. The State grant funds were included in the budget process for the 1999-01 two-year financial plan, and previously approved by the City Council. The recent budget process included information and discussion on these funds in a public hearing setting. However, the program requires that the City Council formally approve the use of funds at a formally noticed separate public hearing,and as such, it is presented to Council at this time. Conclusion This three year State grant has allowed the City to acquire critical public safety equipment and technology, and to fund public safety personnel. With the recommended action, the City will gain valuable public safety resources and will also demonstrate our commitment to the intent of the grant legislation for providing front line municipal police services to improve law enforcement services in the community. 4-1 Council Agenda Report=Expenditure of State Public.Safety Grant Funds Page CONCURRENCES The State grant fund recommendations were reviewed and previously approved as part of the City'.s 1999-01 financial plan. FISCAL IlVIPACT The State grant funds may be applied to programs or projects which are in existing budgets but are under-funded. There are no fiscal impacts associated with this action. ATTACHMENT Draft resolution allocating expenditure of funds from the 1999-00 State budget. 4-2. RESOLUTION NO. (1999 Series) A RESOLUTION OF THE COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF SAN LUIS OBISPO APPROVING AN EXPENDITURE OF $95,153 FROM THE 1999-00 STATE BUDGET TO ASSIST IN FUNDING PUBLIC SAFETY EQUIPMENT AND PERSONNEL WHEREAS, the adoption of the 1999-00 State budget, the legislature passed AB 1584 which established the Supplemental Local Law Enforcement Fund; and WHEREAS, AB 1584 appropriated $100 million to supplement local law enforcement budgets; and WHEREAS, the City of San Luis Obispo has received $95,153 from the 1999-00 California State budget as granted under AB 1584; and WHEREAS, the funds may be applied to programs or projects which are in existing budgets but are under-funded; and WHEREAS, a public hearing was held on September 21, 1999, to receive public input on the recommendations for the use of these funds; NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED that the Council of the City of San Luis Obispo approves the expenditure of $95,153 as received from the 1999-00 California State budget to assist in funding Public Safety equipment and personnel, and authorizes the City Administrative Officer to execute any grant related documents. Upon motion of , seconded by and on the following roll call vote: AYES: NOES: ABSENT: the foregoing resolution was adopted this day of 11999. ATTEST: Lee Price, City Clerk Mayor Allen Settle APPROVED AS TO FORM: f Jo ns , City Attorney 4-3 MEETING L AGENDA DATE. I ITEM #_ru communication item EICOUNCIL ❑CDD DIR September 10, 1999 HCA0 ❑FIN DIR ®'ACAO ❑FIR=C!'IEF TO: Council Colleagues Cs� ORKNEY ❑PO DIR LERKJORI TEAMM ❑POLICE CHF ❑MGMT TEAM ❑REC DIRK FROM: Dave Romero ❑ ❑ung DIR ❑` ❑PERS DIR SUBJECT: Replacement of City Transit Manager For the past several years, the City has not replaced its city transit manager while the City was awaiting results of a countywide consolidation study. This has resulted in the City operating shorthanded on a continuing basis, resulting in some criticism from the press and the public. At the SLORTA meeting of 9/8/99, it was obvious to me that it will be extremely difficult to overcome political differences inherent in control of a consolidated countywide system, and I am convinced that it is extremely unlikely that we will ever achieve consolidated operations with the current structure of the SLORTA Board. It is difficult for me to find any basis by which, as a member representing San Luis Obispo (scheduled to be Board president next year), I could recommend consolidated operations. Therefore, I suggest that the Council direct staff to proceed with replacement of the transit manager position within the City operation at the earliest possible date. DR:ss /Transit Manager RECEIVED SEP 2 1 1999 ti SLO CITY CLERK :.j i ' AGENDA DAA --�_`�-_.ITEM # u�Soriur Wlson izEpont ®COUNCIL MUD DIR September 10, 1999 &CAO E FIN DIR Ca ACAO OTME CHIEF TO: Council Colleagues SA ERKIORIG W Uo CE CHF O O❑,MGMT TEAM, EENTERS DI CAEC DIR FROM: Dave Romero nr' "� ErPDIRR q SUBJECT: Integrated Waste Management Report At its meeting of 9/8/99, the IWMA received a report from staff that the preliminary analysis indicates that if the County changes its base year from 1990 (when we were in a recession and drought) to 1998, we will be able to take full advantage of the many waste diversion programs which have been initiated in this County. With the new base year it is quite likely that the County will reach the 50%diversion rate mandated by AB 939. Working against us meeting the mandate is the determination that state agencies (Cal Poly, CMC, Cuesta College and schools) are included in our diversion figures, but not mandated to meet the 50% diversion requirement. This means that the IWMA has very limited authority in working with these agencies to encourage recycling. There is currently a bill, AB 75,which has been passed by the Assembly and is now in the Senate, which will require state agencies and special districts to meet the 50% diversion figure by the year 2004. Passage of this bill will give great assistance to IWMA in pursuing diversion programs and meeting the state mandated goals. DR:ss /IWMA- Sept 99 RECEIVED SEP 1 4 1999 S1_O �: `: C: ERK MrcTING AGENDA G. _ q-dl-VI ITEM # Lia PW- liaison Pwpopn September 10, 1999 TO: Council Colleagues 'A7T0R'-cY C'lF�: ...1 FROM: Dave Romero M Ler:'/ [�FOLICE C:!F ❑1. JT TEAM . [ REC DIA Q" el lb '�` E�NTIL DIR SUBJECT: San Luis Obispo Regional Transit Authority/ 13 [xi'ERS DIR Council of Governments Meetings SLORTA At its meeting of 9/8/99 the SLORTA Board, on a split vote, determined that it would abandon the RFP process which was intended to provide economies of scale by consolidation of contracts with transit service providers. Of necessity, the process was very complicated, with so many options that bids were difficult to analyze. Naturally, the unsuccessful bidders contested the process and staff recommendations. The current Board direction to staff is to prepare contracts for continuation of service with the current providers for an additional six month period. This will allow the Board a chance to regroup and decide where to go from here. After the bids were received, San Luis Obispo determined that there was no financial advantage to being included in the contract award. Atascadero and Paso Robles negotiated separately with the low bidders. Therefore, there was no advantage in including these three cities in the contract. On a related matter, the failure to award contracts for consolidated services makes it even more unlikely that we will be able to come to agreement on consolidated transit operations. That report is due to the Board within the next month. COG At its meeting of 9/8/99, the Board directed staff to proceed with establishment of a steering committee to advise as to how the County should proceed regarding a local sales tax option for transportation improvements. The Board was informed that should SCA-3 fail to receive approval in the State Assembly(it has subsequently failed), there is a good likelihood for a statewide initiative to place this issue on the ballot. Since the time frame is so tight, it is prudent to proceed with preliminary work in anticipation that the initiative would be approved by the voters. The Board received a report that Sen. O'Connell is requesting state forgiveness of approximately $400,000 which was advanced to the COG for the call box program. If the advance is forgiven, there will be sufficient funds to complete the call box program on all state HE RECEIVED SEP 1 4 1999 SLO %iTY CLERK the County in the very near future. Incidentally, for the.April_June 1999 period, the CHP indicates there were an average of 361 calls per month,-or 2.6 calls per box. About 1/5'h of these calls were from the call boxes on the Cuesta Grade: AllCouncil Members have received a report entitled "San Luis Obispo Council of-Governments Annual Report FY 1998/99" Please review it for information as to activities of SLOCOG which has so much influence on our city. DR.ss SLORTA:mtg 9-99 Wr SING AGENDA oilso DAT 9-ar �iy E � cit 1 o san hu, �/..J77OFFICE OF THE CITY COUNCIL 990 Palm Street ■ San Luis Obispo,CA 93401-3249 ■ 805/781-7119 September 14, 1999 E ❑CDD DIR ❑FIN DIR ❑FIRE CHIEF Honorable Gray Davis ❑PW DIR Governor of California ❑P9LICE CHF State Capitol Building EC DIR ❑�1L DIR Sacramento,Ca 95814 g'pQ{S DI I.3 RE: Veto of Appropriations for Subsidized Child Care for CalWORKS Dear Governor Davis, I am writing because I am deeply concerned about your veto of$50,000 subsidized child care for CalWORKS and low income families in San Luis Obispo for the Fiscal Year 1999-2000. Knowing your concern for children,I believe that your veto must have been a terrible mistake. As a Board Member of the San Luis Obispo County Economic Opportunity Commission and liaison from the San Luis Obispo City Council,I request that you fmd a way to reinstate the originally allocated funding as soon as possible. The loss of funding has had a devastating effect on our local action agency,the Economic Opportunity Commission of San Luis Obispo County(EOC). Without restoration of these funds,EOC,which runs child care programs in ten counties,will be unable to meet its financial obligations to child care providers at Stages 2 and 3, as well as Greater Child care, for local income families not part of CalWORKS. This is further explained in the attached memorandum dated September 13, 1999 from Sheri Wilson,Child Care Resource Center Director, Economic Opportunity Commission. Loss of funding for Stage 3 child care(child care for families with a history of being on welfare at the point they are beginning to be independent)will have an incredible negative effect. Those families need that extra financial support so that they can "squeak by"while they are beginning to establish the self sufficiency necessary to provide them with lasting independence from welfare. If you do not rescind your veto,we will see these Stage 3 families returning to welfare,one by one. Welfare was designed to provide a safety net for children. Now,that safety net no longer exists. To remove Stage 3 child care subsidy at this point would be to subject children,women and subsidized child care to terrible, terrible risk. Thank you for reconsidering your decision. Yours, Jan Howell Marx Council Member Attachment c: Senator Jack O'Connell RECEIVED Elizabeth Steinberg, Executive Director of EOC San Luis Obispo City Council SEP 1 6 1999 SLO CITY CLERK MEMORANDUM TO: Beth Schneider Biz Steinberg Cc Debby Jeter FROM: Sheri Wilson DATE: September 13,1999 SUBJECT: PRELIMINARY FUNDING FOR CaIWORKs STAGES AND GREATER CHILD CARE FISCAL YEAR 1999-2000 This memorandum is pursuant to my presentation at the Welfare Reform TaMorce meeting of August 26, 1999. At this meeting, we discussed the dilemma that pertains to the recent actions of Governor Gray Davis in regard to appropriations for subsidized child care for CaIWORKs and low income families in San Luis Obispo County for Fiscal Year 1999-2000. With the allocated funding to date, there will be a shortfall of dollars to fund child care through fiscal year end. The following detailed information is the latest and best analysis of dollar amounts that are currently contracted for Ca1WORKs and greater child care funding. There is mention of supplemental funding for Stage 2 and 3 families at the State level. To date,the Child Care Resource Connection has been unable to find out what future allocations may be made. While waiting to find out how many child care dollars will be made available in San Luis Obispo County,interim steps are being implemented to assure continued service for those families currently enrolled in subsidized child care prograrns. Ca1WORKs ♦ Stage 1 All referred families are being enrolled See Attachment 1 t Stage 2 No new enrollments can be accepted Sec Attachment 2 Children no longer on cash aid who would routinely be transferred to Stage 2 will remain in Stage 1 Stage 3 No new enrollments can be accepted See Attachment 3 Greater Child Care • No new enrollments can being accepted See Attachment 4 To illustrate how funding could be managed with no additional dollars coming into the County, please refer to the attached charts which show when funds will expire in each child care contract. Chart I Current Contractual Conuaitment Chart 2 Transfer including 11 and 12 year olds Chart 3 Transfer excluding I 1 and 12 year olds • Attachment 1 Stave 1 State Funding/$1,518,796 Enrollment/545 children 1999!2000 Received Sia/a of 1998/1999 Funding Stage 1 families are referred from San Luis Obispo Department of Social Serviccs to EOC Child Care Resource Connection for subsidized childcare. The fondling amount for provider payments for Fiscal Year 1999/2000 is S 1,518,786. With current enrollment for the 99/00 fiscal year in Stage 1, CCRC can make provider payments through April 2000. (See Chart 1) CCRC is currently serving 513 active CalWorks children in Stage 2. Of the 513 children, 194 children's families are still receiving cash aid. In the event all families still receiving cash aid in Stage 2 were transferred to Stage 1,funding for Stage 1 would be available through February 2000. (See Chart 2) Of the 194 active CalWorks children in Stage 2, 110 children are i 1 and 12 year olds. The remaining 84 children are from families who wcre transferred to Stage 2 due to stability of their CalWork-s plan. If the 110 children were to remain in Stage 2 and the remaining 84 children were transfemd to Stage 1,funding for Stage i would be available through March 2000. (See Chart 3) Attachment 2 Sta¢e 2—State and Federal State Funding/5416,687 Enrollment/398 children- Federal Fundin0341,430 Enrolhment'115 children Total Stage 2 Enrollment/513 children 1999/2000 Received M of 199811999 Funding The finding amount for Stage 2, Federal and General provider payment, is$758,117 for Fiscal Year 1999/2000, With current enrollment funding for Stage 2 will be available through December 1999. (See Chart 1) CCRC is currently serving 513 active CalWorks children in Stage 2. Of the 513 children, 194 children's families are gtill recei-,*cash aid. In the event all families still receiving cash aid in Stage 2 were transferred to Stage 1,funding for Stage 2 would be available through February 2040. (See Chart 2) Of tae 194 active CalWorks children in Stage 2, 110 children are 11 and 12 year olds, The remaining 84 children are from families who were transferred to Stage 2 due to stability of their CalWorks plan. If the 110 children were to remain in Stage 2 and the remain' 84 children were transferred to Stage 1, funding for Stage 2 would be available through March 2000. (See Chart 3) Attachment 3 aIWORKS Stavre 3 Federal and Genml Sta e 2 aterim Federal FundinglSS2,434 Enrollment/35 children General Fuading/S00.00 Enrollment 171 children Stage 2 Interim FundinStS72,392 Enrollment/7lchildren 1999/Z000 Received 51%of 1998/1999 Funding The Governor has vetoed$50 million appropriated by the legislature for Stage 3 General funds. This eliminated CCRC's Stage 3 General funds. In response to this veto,the California Department of Education created a Stage 2 lntetim contract to fund the former Stage 3 General fund families. The Stage 2 Interim contract is a one-year contract with six months funding. Due to high enrollments in the fourth quarter CCRC will only be able to fund these families through the month of October 1999(4 months). CCRC has been instructed to keep track of the Stage 2 Interim families in case of a possible grandfathering of these families or a change in legislation regarding the$50 million vetoed. (See Chart 1) If there is no attrition with the families enrolled in Stage 3 Federal then the current funding will be available through April,2000. Because the frmds are insufficient for Stage 3 Federal,CCRC will not be able to transfer any Stage 2 families into Stage 3 when their 24-month clocks tun out. Therefore,the Stage 2 families that run out of time will lose their childcare and be on the eligibility waiting list for greater childcare. CCRC usually has a small percentage of family attrition throughout the year. Through this attrition CCRC might be able to serve the current families enrolled in Stage 3 Federal, but,the attrition will not be enough to transfer new families into Stage 3 from Stage 2. (See Chart 1) Attachment 4 ` Greater Child Care GAPP State Fundin0322,894 Enrollment/149 children FAPP Federal Funding/S426,756 F,arollmeWI IS children 99/2000 Received 1001/6 of 1998/19W Funding Eligibility Waiting List: 230 Children receiving no child care subsidy. The Greater Child Care Program provides child care for$unifies with active Child Protective Service cases and for faurlies that meet specific income and"need'requirements. Families am enrolled from the programs eligibility%'siting list. The state program pays for child care from birth to age 14 or birth to age 21 for children with special needs. The federal program covers child care from birth to age 13 or birth to age 18 for children with special needs. The first flriotity for enrollment is documented active Child Protective Service cases. The second onoriV is based on family income. Sufficient funding was available to enro4 75 children off the waiting list in the spring of 1999. These children were enrolled on a"limited tern"basis for six months Come=projections for twelve months of child care for all children prr&pdy enrolled reflect a shortage of$119,995. if historical attrition rates remain stabl%existing funding might be adequate for current enrollees as long as to new child_+p*±ate enrolled. CCRC's maior concern for the Greater Child Care�is: All recipients of Stage 2 funding who exhaust their twenty foto month time Hmit for child care on or after 1/1/1000 will be in jeopardy. Since no slots are available for CaIWORKs Stage 3 child care,these children will be added to the unfunded Greater Child Care eligibility waiting list,which already includes 230 children from low income households. This could be devastating for any CaIWORKs participant recently employed at an entry-level pay scale and nning begito transition from CaIWORKs to self-sufficiency. (See Chart 1) ■ CIO $ kffQ§ i { 2 § � § _ a . � ° § & m § , ■ - e _ , ■ % q § 7e \ \ k 2 _- - 7 ] ir ■ \ � � ) . k � � _ _ ■ _ _ a E 2 � $ � ? § © � ■ ! . - � \ § 2 ■ ' ° k - k J6 G . . . ul . _ , co m E � 7 ' � \ \ 40 \ k � � � ■ E °o & : . � t . _ # § � # % 2 ■ \ i . _ rr o N g to O � S N N O O 8 pN 40 49 J Q_ w ;. �i 40 LA i N :�i:� -.'i sari•�'. ."N.'.i'Y:::�i•:::: .�, 1'A'A —I AMS. A'AN N... •�•••� � `C :�:;::.�,�::�'.:':.�':.:'.':::•.�'.::::'..:.�.'.�..:.Vii:. 'Y }'.:.........N. N n =i: CA ,. O 1 \'.Y.•'.Y,AV N��\N '.'All: 'i:.Y. Y:• _ fa m :;Eu:t:i r. o e -p �[ '.l.N•e�:: W.VI. ]i.A' iAY 4TN 4w 0 YN•.•V•A • �1 - =:< ` �. + ,,.;: :inn nv_.�? ' +��:: ':i•. O � �: V V p M N M - n A - 9 V r m � � Y A r! g Jk Q