Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAboutSupplemental Information Received After Posting Agenda - Items B, D, H, FRobin Roberts From: Robert Goldberg < Sent: Saturday, September 09, 2017 4:56 PM To: Mike Varipapa; Ellery A. Deaton; Schelly Sustarsic; Thomas Moore; Sandra Massa -Lavitt Cc: Robin Roberts; Jill Ingram Subject: Questions and Comments on Monday's Agenda Robert Goldberg has shared aOneDrive file with you. To view it, click the link below. 0 9.11.17.Questions.doc Dear City Council Members and City Staff, For your consideration, I am submitting the attached questions and comments regarding Monday's agenda. Robert Goldberg Questions & Comments Item B: Fire Services Ad Hoc Committee The resolution calls for the appointment of citizens with "knowledge, education, or experience in the delivery of fire and emergency medical services." I agree that that finding such citizens is highly desirable. However, I think finding such a citizen who is also willing to serve from each district may be difficult. Therefore, I would recommend amending the resolution to give each Council member the option of selecting a citizen who may not reside in his or her district. Given the complexity of this issue and its citywide implications, I think having the most informed citizens empaneled is more important district representation. I personally know of two very well- informed citizens in the First District, and have been told of a third as well. Item D: Demands on Treasury Page 3, top third: Check #2556 to Cal JPIA for $239,288 for FY 17 -18 property Insurance. The approved budgeted amount for this was only $215,000 (page 67 in Budget[. Thus, the actual cost is $24,288 over budget. Note that the projected budget surplus was only $11,000 before this payment was made. Page 4, bottom: Check 2578 to Govinvest for $12,315 for "Total Liability Calculator - Pension/OPEB." This follows a payment to Govinvest on 6/15/17 of $10,200. Please explain what this service or calculator is. Page 21, top third: Check #2751 to Richards Watson & Gershon for June 2017 services Includes charges of $19,896 and $18,273 related to the Gentner Litigation (Gum Grove tree cutting). To the best of my knowledge, legal fees for this litigation began in July 2016 following Gentner's rejection of the City's offer to settle the matter for $89,300. To date, they total $175,610, leaving only a net of $74,390 remaining from the settlement amount of $250,000 which the Council approved in closed session on 6/26/17. Item H: Vehicle Replacement Page 2 states that $100,000 has been allocated by the FY 17 -18 budget to replace and up -fit the police vehicle. However, page 237 of the budget shows $180,000 for vehicles. Additionally, at the workshop on 5/30/17, the Council was told that the police vehicle purchase and up -fit had an estimated cost of $50,000. Why is staff citing a $100,000 figure is the staff report? The Budget Amendment on page 3 states that current Revised /Adopted figure for 'Transfer In" [Tidelands] is $729,900. However, the figure on the budget on page 23 is $720,900. Is the $729,900 figure incorrect? Robin Roberts From: Robert Goldberg Sent: Saturday, September 09, 2017 5:54 PM To: Mike Varipapa; Ellery A. Deaton; Schelly Sustarsic; Thomas Moore; Sandra Massa -tavitt Cc: Robin Roberts; Jill Ingram; Joe Miller Subject: Supplemental Questions and Comments on Item F: Emergency Plan Attachments: 9. 11 .17.Questions.supplemental.doc Dear City Council Members and City Staff, For your consideration, I am submitting the attached questions and comments regarding Item F, Emergency Operations Plan. Robert Goldberg Questions & Comments (supplemental) Item F: Emergency Operations Plan Page 78 describes evaluation zones for various tsunami heights. However, the zone description for "Phase 3" [height 5.0 -11.5 feet] and "Maximum Phase" [height greater than 11.5 feet] is the same. Is this correct? Pages 78 and 79 provide a list of designated shelter sites (schools) and possible alternate sites (churches). Would any of these allow residents to bring pets with them? (If so, this should be noted in the plan. If not then either an animal- accommodating sheltershould be added to the list or detailed planning on how the animals of residents in need of sheltering will be transported and cared for.} Is there some reason that all or some our local community centers or libraries could not function as shelter sites? Page 0 -12 states that "The Shelter Services Branch also has responsibilities for animal care, often in coordination with Orange County Animal Care Services and other organizations. Given that we have no functional relationship (no contract) with OC Animal Care currently, would they be our primary resource for animal care in an emergency as opposed to Long Beach Animal Care and our local SB Animal Care Center?