Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAboutReso. 1987 - 101 - Approving and adopting certain supplemental appopriations, calculated as of april 21, 1987 RESOLUTION NO. 41 ,7-10/ A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF REDDING APPROVING AND ADOPTING CERTAIN SUPPLEMENTAL APPROPRIATIONS, CALCULATED AS OF APRIL 21 , 1987 , AND TO BE EFFECTIVE FOR THE REMAINDER OF THE FISCAL YEAR ENDING JUNE 30, 1987. WHEREAS, the City Council has previously adopted a budget for the fiscal year ending June 30, 1987; and WHEREAS, such budget contained estimated revenue and appropriations for said fiscal year; and WHEREAS, it has been determined by the Finance Director that certain supplemental appropriations must be approved at this time to balance the City' s accounts for said fiscal year. NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED by the City Council of the City of Redding as follows: 1 . That the foregoing recitals are true and correct. 2. That it is deemed to be in the best interests of the City of Redding to approve and adopt the following supplemental appropriation and fund transfer at this time. 3. That said adjustment shall be in accordance with Exhibit "B" attached hereto and incorporated herein by reference as though fully set forth at this point. I HEREBY CERTIFY that the foregoing Resolution was introduced and read at a regular meeting of the City Council of N • • the City of Redding on the 21st day of April , 1987, and was duly adopted at said meeting by the following vote: AYES: COUNCIL MEMBERS: Carter, Fulton, Gard, Johannessen and Dahl NOES: COUNCIL MEMBERS: None ABSENT: COUNCIL MEMBERS: None ABSTAIN: COUNCIL MEMBERS: None 1.) (:)1a444_,0 MIKE DAHL, Mayor City of Redding ATTEST: ETHEL A. NICHOLS, City Clerk FO PPROVED: fRA DALL A. HAYS, City Attorney -2- ,I , 0 • CITY OFeDDING ITEM NO. 4-9-2 (o) REPORT TO CITY COUNCIL MEETING DATE 04/21/87 APPROVED BY DEPARTMENT DIRECTOR DATE: April 16 , 1987 ,e,„,; ti e B-050-100-000 CITY MANAGER C27w/;/ FROM: Director of Finance -;e7.1.°;el'r SUBJECT: Requesting Approval for Resolution for Supplemental Appropriation Recreation and Parks Department Background Attached is the Recreation and Parks Department' s staff report submitted to Council on 4/7/87 requesting approval of the renovation of CDF buildings in South City Park and authorizing an additional $21 ,000 from Park Development Funds. Conclusions and Recommendations Since Council approve the above request, we are requesting approval for the required supplemental appropriation and a resolution for that purpose is attached hereto. "EXHIBIT B" • CITY OF WING ITEM NO. 9-8 (a) MEETING DATE 4-7 -87 REPORT TOCITY COUNCIL APPROVED BY DEPARTMENT DIFECTOR DATE: March 31 , 1987 JC�C�� CITY,MANAGE. I FROM: Director of Recreation and Parks SUBJECT: Renovation of CDF Buildings in South City Park Background The California Department of Forestry' s 50-year lease of City-owned property adjacent to South City Park expired July 1 , 1985 . Due to a number of reasons , CDF did not vacate 100% off the facility until October 1986 . The original plan was to move the Recreation and Parks administration and field forces to the CDF facility. Due to a number of logistical reasons, it was recommended that the Fire Department occupy the present administration offices and that Recreation and Parks renovate the three buildings (barracks, mess hall, and recrea- tion room) on the north side of the complex adjacent to Tiger Field baseball park. On January 5 , 1987, Recreation and Parks Commission requested City Council to approve $30 , 000 for renovation of the buildings . The Recreation Department is presently lacking indoor facilities for proper programming. The Department currently has Tiger Hall and Community Cottage for scheduling community programs, and is presently at the mercy of local school districts for use of their classrooms . If these buildings are renovated, additional programs, such as the handicap, the Stamp Club, Bridge Club, Fly Fishers Club, Umpires Association, Officials Association, General Interest Classes , Cook- ing, Adult Dancing Classes , Arts and Crafts , and others can be offered to the residents . The project provides better security for the Tiny Tots and the handicap program because there would be toilet facilities made in one of the buildings as opposed to separate restrooms associated with Tiger Hall. Issues The Department of Public Works put together plans and specifications providing for the renovation of the three buildings with a project estimate of $30 , 000 . Three bids were received and ranged from a low of $50 , 817 to $66 , 478 . The contractors indicated that the work required significantly more supervision and detail work than envi- sioned by the Engineer and as can be seen, even between themselves , the evaluation was uneven. Working on the assumption that the services to be provided are desired, a question now arises in regard to the future use of the former CDF property. r • Renovation of CDF Buildings in South City Park March 31 , 1987 Page 2 If the cost of the renovation were to be pro-rated over the next few years , it could be amortized as follows : 3 years or approximately $5646 per year/building 5 years or approximately $3387 per year/building 7 years or approximately $2419 per year/building While the expenditure may seem high ($50 , 817) , the cost to contract similar facilities would be $150 , 000 . Rental cost would be equal over the three-year example and much higher for the other two exam- ples even if comparable buildings could be found close together and with the necessary characteristics already constructed. If the buildings are renovated, the Community Cottage would be utilized for City administrative expansion, i.e. the Housing Department has been considered as a replacement for this building. Alternatives and Implications of Alternatives The Council has the following options : 1 . Proceed with project and authorize an additional $21 ,000 from Park Development Funds. 2 . Cancel renovation (staff recommends the buildings be demolished due to vandalism and present unsafe electrical conditions) . 3 . Rebid the project to renovate two buildings and demolish a third to keep the project closer to the budget estimate. Conclusions and Recommendations There is a need for facilities for community organizations to meet and conduct many viable programs and while this is not a community center facility, it would be economically feasible to provide neces- sary square footage by renovation rather than new construction. The Recreation and Parks Commission and staff recommend that the Council approve the additional $21 , 000 for the completion of this project.