|
Agenda Item
ASR
Control 06-000360 |
||
|
MEETING DATE: |
03/07/06 |
|
|
legal entity taking action: |
Board of Supervisors |
|
|
board of supervisors
district(s): |
All Districts |
|
|
SUBMITTING
Agency/Department: |
County Executive Office (Approved) |
|
|
Department contact
person(s): |
Shunna Austin 834-4146 |
|
|
|
Steve Dunivent 834-3530 |
|
Subject: Harbor Patrol Funding Recommendations
|
ceo Concur |
County
Counsel Review |
Clerk of the Board |
||
|
Concur |
N/A |
Discussion |
||
|
|
|
3 Votes Board Majority |
||
|
|
|
|
||
|
Budgeted: N/A |
Current Year Cost:
N/A |
Annual Cost:
N/A |
||
|
|
|
|
||
|
Staffing Impact: No |
# of Positions:
|
Sole Source:
N/A |
||
|
Current Fiscal Year Revenue: N/A |
||||
|
Funding Source: N/A |
||||
|
|
||||
|
Prior Board Action: November
2005 Strategic Financial Plan Adoption - December 13, 2005 |
||||
RECOMMENDED ACTION(S)
1. Approve Option 3 from the 4 funding options for Harbor Patrol Services identified in the Background Information
SUMMARY:
In September 2005, A Harbor Patrol Funding Analysis was presented to the Board following a Board directive to study the Harbor Patrol budget and assess the use of general funds or other revenue sources for these services. In addition, a list of Harbors, Beaches, and Parks (HBP) Deferred Maintenance and Capital projects was included for consideration of funding which may become available as a result of any Board action on Harbor Patrol. The item was deferred to the 2005 Strategic Financial Plan process.
Four funding alternatives for Harbor Patrol Services were presented to the Board of Supervisors for their consideration as part of the November 2005 Strategic Financial Plan (Adopted December 13, 2005). Following discussion, staff was directed to continue to work with the Sheriff Department on additional options that would provide financial relief to the park funds and still allow the financial plan to remain balanced.
Staff developed further options that met the main objective of HBP and Dana Point Harbor funding relief and is recommending Option 3 - Backfill Harbors, Beaches and Parks and Dana Point Harbor shares of Harbor Patrol costs with other funding.
BACKGROUND INFORMATION:
On December 13, 2005, the Board of Supervisors tentatively approved the November 2005 Strategic Financial Plan. Staff was directed to return to the Board with recommendations on Harbor Patrol Funding incorporating the use of funds already allocated in the financial plan to other programs.
The current funding arrangement for the $10.4 million annual Harbor Patrol Services cost consists of Harbors, Beaches and Parks (HBP) Funds (55%); Dana Point Harbor (DPH) Funds (30%); and Newport Tidelands Funds (15%).
Four funding arrangements were examined (See Exhibit A).
Option 1 – Backfill Sheriff Department with 100% of other funding for Harbor Patrol
Option 2 – Backfill Sheriff Department with 75% of other funding for Harbor Patrol
Option 3 – Backfill HBP and DPH shares of Harbor Patrol costs with other funding
Option 4 – Sheriff cover cost of variance between “basic” level of service and current level.
Other funding includes a combination of the following sources:
SB 90 reimbursement revenues; funds previously allocated to HBP; Sheriff General Fund Capital Project allocation; other unidentified capital project funds; and funds allocated for augmentations in the strategic financial plan. Exhibit A breaks down the amount of other funds needed to implement each option and the resulting savings to HBP, Dana Point Harbor and Newport Tidelands.
Option 1 would eliminate all charges for Harbor Patrol to the HBP, Dana Point and Newport Tidelands funds thereby saving HBP $5.7 million; DPH $3.1 million; and Newport Tidelands $1.6 million on an annual basis. This option impacts the ability to fund $900,000 in other county program augmentations and $1 million in capital projects. It also incorporates the use of a portion of the Sheriff's General Fund Capital Project allocation. Also under this scenario, $5.1 million would come from SB 90 reimbursements and $2 million, previously allocated to HBP from the County’s 2005 Refinance savings, will transfer over to the Sheriff. This option would cap the growth of Harbor Patrol cost at the growth in Net County Cost. The incentive for cost control would rest with the Sheriff.
Option 2 would also eliminate all charges for Harbor Patrol to the HBP, Dana Point and Newport Tidelands funds thereby saving HBP $5.7 million; DPH $3.1 million; and Newport Tidelands $1.6 million on an annual basis. This option includes the use of a portion of the Sheriff's General Fund Capital Project Allocation. Under this scenario, $4.4 million would come from SB 90 reimbursements and $ 2 million, previously allocated to HBP from the County’s 2005 Refinance savings, will transfer over to the Sheriff. In addition, it assumes the Sheriff covers $2.6 million of the Harbor Patrol Cost within his existing NCC limit based on the idea that a portion of the service can be considered public safety. This option would cap the growth of Harbor Patrol costs at the growth in Net County Cost. The incentive for cost control would rest with the Sheriff.
Option 3 would continue the Sheriff Department charges for Harbor Patrol to the HBP, Dana Point and Newport Tidelands funds. However, HBP and Dana Point Harbor would receive a backfill for those charges from $3.8 million of SB 90 reimbursements, and the Sheriff's $3.0 million General Fund Capital project allocation. HBP would keep the $2 million previously allocated from the County refinancing savings. The backfill to HBP and Dana Point Harbor would be subject to annual review. Newport Tidelands will continue to contribute its share of Harbor Patrol costs because there are sufficient outside revenues to do so and the fund's need for financial relief is not as pressing as the other two funds. This option provides the most flexibility and can tie funding allocation to specific projects and timelines.
Option 4 defines a basic level of service for the Harbor Patrol program as one that employs Sheriff Special Officers as opposed to Sheriff Deputy IIs. The estimated variance in salary for the 40 positions is $2 million annually. This option recommends the Sheriff absorb the variance in cost as a means to continue Harbor Patrol Services at the current level. The remaining $8.4 million in cost would be spread across the HBP, Dana Point and Newport Tidelands funds according to the currently prescribed formula. This option will save HBP $1.1 million; DPH $600,000; and Newport Tidelands $300,000 annually.
Staff recommendation is Option 3. This option provides the most flexibility and can tie funding allocation to specific projects and timelines. It would allow increased funding for HBP’s Strategic Plan annually as funds are available and would also allow support for financing of the Dana Point Harbor Revitalization. Under this option, funding is subject to annual availability determined in the SFP and annual budget process.
As part of the next Strategic Financial Plan update, Staff will incorporate a revised Sources and Uses schedule consistent with the approval of the funding recommendation for Harbor Patrol services.
FINANCIAL IMPACT:
N/A
STAFFING IMPACT:
N/A
EXHIBIT(S):
Harbor Patrol Funding Options Table