Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAboutAGENDA REPORT 1988 0106 CC REG ITEM 11H MOORPARK ITEM // . JOHN GALLOWAY STEVEN KUENY Mayor City Manager ELOISE BROWN oo ►'`. CHERYL J. KANE Mayor Pro Tern jo��/`st City Attorney CLINT HARPER, Ph.D. ���° PATRICK RICHARDS,A.I.C.P. Councilmember ��'r Director of JOHN PATRICK LANE Community Community Development Councilmember a � o R. DENNIS DELZEIT MAUREEN W.WALL4, +" City Engineer City Clerk �`° '� JOHN V. GILLESPIE THOMAS P. GENOVESE Chief of Police City Treasurer MEMORANDUM TO: The Honorable Mayor and City Council FROM: Steve Kueny, City Manager DATE: December 31, 1987 SUBJECT: NOTICE OF TERMINATION FROM COUNTY OF VENTURA FOR BUILDING AND SAFETY SERVICES BACKGROUND: As you are aware, the City has received notification from the County of Ventura that they are terminating Building and Safety Services to the City effective May 31 , 1988. This provides the City about five (5) months to develop and implement a means of replacement. It would be beneficial to have a minimum of 30 days for the City' s replacement staff/contractor to work with the County for a successful transition. SERVICES: Building and Safety services can be essentially broken into three basic functions: plan check, inspectors and public counter support. Plan check generally involves new construction of residential , commercial or industrial buildings. Patio covers, swimming pools and the like do not require plan check services. Inspections cover all field work and include enforcement of Uniform Building Codes (substandard and dangerous buildings). Often services include providing counter information. The above functions are supported by clerical staffing, supervisory personnel and inspectors. 799 Moorpark Avenue Moorpark, California 93021 (805) 529-6864 City Council Notice of Termination December 31, 1987 Page 2 ALTERNATIVES: The alternatives to providing the service include: 1. Contract with another public agency; 2. Contract with a private firm; 3. In house City staff (city department). The City can consider contracting with another City to provide services either on an interim or long term basis. This would be a substantial increase in workload for them and would require the hiring of additional staff. The major advantage is that there would be no down time. This could be complicated since many cities contract for plan check services. This may require three party agreements or separate contracts for plan check and inspection services. It would appear that this option would be very similar to establishing our own city department. The City is well aware of the benefits and problems of contracting for services. Both plan check and inspection can be provided for by one firm. Adapting to fluctuations in building activity is more easily accomplished with a contract as opposed to in-house staff. Start up costs such as equipment vehicles and training are minimized or avoided. As with the current County contract, rent and other overhead costs are part of the hourly rate. It should not require any appreciable change in the amount of City staff time to administer the contract. The City can probably solicit proposals, make a selection of a private firm and allow for a minimum transition period with the private contract alternative prior to May 31, 1988. TIMING: The creation of a City department probably could not be adequately accomplished prior to May 31, 1988. The selection, orientation/training and start-up transition processes would probably take at least six months. Without a formal analysis it would appear that a four person staff ( 3 Inspectors/Administrative and 1 clerical) would be needed. As previously mentioned, the City would still need to contract for plan check services. Depending upon building activity the City could face periods of relatively little inspection (i .e. idle time) and other periods where even with overtime inspection requests may not be accommodated. A City department is more likely to have difficulty in adjusting to these fluctuations. City Council Notice of Termination December 31, 1987 Page 3 City staff is proceeding in the preparation of information concerning building and safety services including historical and projected building activity, costs and revenue, requirements for a City department, discussion with the County regarding a transition program and survey of other cities using private firms for building and safety services to develop a list of qualified firms as well as those cities' experiences on this matter. Even though I recommend that the Council proceed with the private contract alternative, the above information is necessary to prepare an agreement and provide background data to prospective firms. Information concerning a City department is important to insure that the private contract is the best long term alternative. I feel that the May 31, 1988 termination date is cutting it too close. I also recommend that the Council request the Board of Supervisors to modify the termination date to June 30, 1988. This would also coincide with both agencies' fiscal year. STAFF RECOMMENDATION: Direct staff to: 1. Request County to modify contract termination date to June 30, 1988; 2. Prepare Request For Proposal and related documents for private firm to provide Building and Safety Services for Council review at February 3, 1988 Council Meeting; 3. Develop background information on this matter for presentation to the Council on February 3, 1988. In addition, it is recommended that the Council ' s Budget and Finance Committee or other designated Committee be directed to work with City staff on this matter. SK: rjh MCity cot, CAtIFpRNIq of�'— -cot, Meeting 198-j 0- . ' By / •