Recommendation to restore the $517,000 in sidewalk funds appropriated to the Fire Department on a "divide by 9" basis ($57,444 per council district) back to their original intent - sidewalk repairs.
Item 39. Communication from Councilmember Gary DeLong, Councilmember Sudha Lowenthal and Councilman Al Austin. Recommendation to restore the 517,000 and sidewalk funds appropriation to the fire department on a divide by nine basis. 57,444 per council district. Back to the original intent. Sidewalk Repairs. Mr. DELONG Thank you, Mr. Mayor. On September 3rd of 2013, the City Council approved a budget that included loaning $517,000 of sidewalk repair funds to the fire department for the restoration of services, specifically Engine eight and Rescue 12. Specifically, the motion stated 517,000 for two months of funding for restoration of fire station engine eight and Rescue Unit 12 taken from sidewalk repair funds with the provision that the sidewalk repair fund would be backfilled upon receipt of excess funds from the State of California EMT program. Shortly after that, it started becoming clearer that our hopes for EMT funding perhaps were overly ambitious and it was going to be significantly less than what we had originally hoped for. So at that point, a decision was made to postpone for 30 days the restoration of services just in case the money wasn't going to come. And then when a little more time went on. It became clear that it wasn't coming. And in fact, what what ended up coming would be a significantly smaller number. So it was certainly my expectation as the maker of the motion that since those services were not restored, that the money would be returned back to the Sidewalk Fund . For whatever reason, that didn't happen. So that is my recommendation tonight, is to restore the $517,000 in sidewalk funds that were previously appropriate. The fire department restored on a divided by nine basis $57,444 per council district back to their original intent sidewalk repairs permit. Mr. O'DONNELL. Thank you, Mr. Mayor. Mr.. DELONG And I had some conversations about that with about this. And he is correct that when the Council gave direction with regard to that $500,000, that it was to be returned for, I believe, further sidewalk use, as he has stated. I don't have a problem with that perception because I think that is accurate. My only question is, is this the right thing to do given that this money is in the fire department budget? And I want to know what impact removing this money will have on the fire budget. Mr. West. Our budget manager. Leon Erickson, will answer that. Mr. Beyer to Councilmember O'Donnell. Right now, the fire department is using that money to support their operating budget. And if they're if the money is redirected to sidewalks, what would happen is previously approved, funds from the EMT that were appropriated in November by council wouldn't be needed instead for the operating budget and fire and without wind mean is that the administration's plan to use to EMT funds for fire equipment next year would be would be challenged. Maybe the chief can weigh in on this because we had a conversation today. I think he's I think his comments were similar to yours. I just want to make sure that your reaction here. I want to I want to know what impact we would have on the fire budget. That was the question. And I know it's been explained just a minute ago. Could you Chief, can you could you offer your opinion? Mr. Mayor? Council members, council member O'DONNELL If the council were to elect to take the $517,000 that was appropriated into the fire's budget back to be used for other purposes, that would leave us $517,000 whole, that would have to be filled. We would anticipate filling that hole with available GMT one time revenue that would come in, which would into the next fiscal year diminish our ability to use that GMT one time revenue to offset the cost of apparatus, vehicles or equipment or other one time needs within the fire department. So it would have an impact and some of those one time needs where there gender equity issues that were being addressed for some capital improvement projects, is that correct? Council the the fire department has been granted funding by the council to address our privacy needs within the fire stations. However, additional one time funding we use for things in the facilities that may not be specifically related to privacy. But because we have the station opened up and we are remodeling it, we want to use additional one time funding to offset the cost of some of those things. For example, if we were to create private spaces for our mixed gender workforce, the kitchen might not necessarily be a privacy issue. But while the station's open, it's it's more fiscally prudent for us to deal with it while it's all open, rather than button it all up and then tear the kitchen out later. So that one time funding could be used to offset the cost of that sort of stuff too, I guess. Right. Right now what I'm doing in my head is I'm trying to figure out what the best use of this money is. I mean, it's accurate to say that it should have been slid back to the to to the sidewalk fund and divide among council districts. I don't have a problem with people having that opinion. I'm just wondering if a better place for this money right now is in the fire budget, given that you are opening walls and you have old fire stations and you find a lot of needs when you do go in to remodel and then you have some equipment needs that you described to me on the phone today. So I'm just have the position that it's probably better off staying in the fire department budget at this time, that that's my point of view . A member of the pub groups, Mr. Dawn? That's right. Go public first, Mr. Arora. And remember, the pub was just canceling the sale. You know, Mr. Dillon. Thank you. You know, I can understand Councilmember O'Donnell's point of view. I do agree with him. I think that there's very valid uses in the fire department for those funds. But I'll also point out that, you know, 500,000 on a $400 million general fund is one eighth of 1%. So, you know, it is a pretty small number in the grand scheme of things if you're trying to find money to do things. I would also say that, you know, if we're going to look at reallocating, let's look a little more holistically on this. Parks and Rec needs as public work needs, our police department always has their needs. So I don't know that we would look at one particular organization and I do go back to the I think there's a point here and a principle that the original policy was it was a loan, there was abuse for restoration of engineering and rescue. 12. And again, that doesn't mean that the fire or any other department couldn't come to the city manager and perhaps the city council and say, Hey, I've got a great idea, I could use some funding for it. Hopefully we're to entertain those requests all the time. But in this particular case, I think there's a principle to be upheld here to follow the council direction. And I would like to see that money restored. And, you know, perhaps the council might look at a subsequent meeting and say, hey, you know, the best use for that is not sidewalks. The best use for that in my district or across city wide is to put it back in the fire department. And that's a decision that the city council can make it on any Tuesday. It's trust. Yes, sir. Thank you very much. I signed on to this this item for the sake of discussion, and I think it's worthy of our time. I did want to get some clarity on the budget because as I recall, during the last budget process, we did appropriate one time moneys for gender accommodations in the fire department. And how much was that? If there's any way to have. 900,000 or 1.8 million, I recall. Okay. We've done that for a couple of years in a row. And I don't think that was enough to finish the entire need. But I think on a go forward basis, we were looking at looking at doing that again in the 2015 budget cycle. I certainly hope the mayor will put that and take that into consideration as he brings forth the budget. So so with that, I support the motion as set forth. Thank you. So now my only point when when you look at the gender equity issue in particular is that we were in a legal situation where there's been some legal activity and we need to pay attention to that so that we don't get caught in a lawsuit . That's why I believe that's so important. But either way. We are where we are. All right. We have a motion in the second item. 39 members cast your votes. Motion carries five one. Okay. Thank you. And we'll go to item 40.