HomeMy WebLinkAboutItem 8.2 BudgStudySessionCITY CLERK FILE #330-20
AGENDA STATEMENT
cTTY COUNCZL MEETZNG DATE: April 3, 2002
SUBJECT:
2002-2003 Budget Study Session
Report Prepared by: Richard C. Ambrose, City Manager
ATTACHMENTS
2.
3.
4.
5.
6.
7.
Analysis of Anticipated 2002-2003 Impacts on the
City's General Fund
Background Financial Information 2A-2E
Summary of 2000-2005 Capital Improvement
Program by Program Area
Budget Issues Worksheet
Resolution No. 80-93 (Policy for Management 8:
Use of General Fund Assets)
Letter from Th-Valley Connections dated March 6,
2002
Letter from Drowning Prevention Foundation dated
March 5, 2002
Receive Staff Report.
Review Budget Issues Worksheet and provide Staff with
direction on each of the issues identified in the Worksheet.
Establish Budget Hearing Date to consider 2002-2003
Annual Budget and Five Year Capital Improvement Program
Update
FINANCIAL STATEMENT:
See attached.
DESCRIPTION: The City's Annual Budget Study Session provides the City Council
with an opportunity to identify those programs, services: and projects the Council would like Staff to
analyze as part of the development of the City's Annual Operating Budget and update to the Five Year
Capital Improvement Program for the upcoming year. The Budget Study Session also serves as a means
of providing the Council with early information regarding those items that may have a significant impact
(positive or negative) on the City's expenditures and revenues in 2002-2003.
The Study Session is also designed to minimize last minute budget issues for which there would be
insufficient time to evaluate.
The Study Session will be most productive if individual Councllmembers review the Fiscal Year
2002-2003 Budget and 2000-2005 Capital Improvement Program documents prior to completing
the Budget Issues Worksheet and bring the completed Budget Issues Worksheet to the Council
meeting for purposes of discussion.
COPIES TO:
ITEM NO. 8'~g
G:\C C-MTGS~2002-qtr2LS. PRIL\4-3 -02g&o~as-budget study, doc
ANALYSIS OF ANTICIPATED FUTURE IMPACTS
ON THE FISCAL YEAR 2002-2003 BUDGET
Staff has identified a number of items that could potentially impact the City's budget for Fiscal Year 2002-
2003. The information identified below is preliminary and is based upon the data available at this time.
REVENUE
Staff anticipates there could be the following positive and negative impacts on the City's revenue for the
upcoming Fiscal Year:
Effects of the recession, resultant impact to the State and to high tech firms, and the national
events that occurred on September 11th - These events have resulted in a significant downturn for
the City in building permit revenue, interest income, transient occupancy tax and sales tax in Fiscal
Year 2001-02. Although the economy appears to be in the initial stages of recovery, it is uncertain at
this time whether the amounts collected in these revenue categories will return to the levels
experienced in Fiscal Year 2000-01.
Property Tax - At this time, Staff anticipates modest growth in the City's property tax as a result of
projects that are already in process and will result in additional assessed valuation for the upcoming
Fiscal Year. It should be noted that pending legislation at the State level could potentially change
the method in which the State's ERAF deduction to property taxes is calculated.
Sales Tax - It is anticipated that there will be an increase in the City's sales tax as a result of
additional spending attributable to new residents and employees, as well as the addition of Sybase
and Home Expo Depot. However, this growth could be slowed somewhat since several auto dealers
have discontinued their "zero percent" financing programs and due to the fact that there is also
increased competition from auto dealerships in nearby cities.
Measure B - Fiscal Year 2002-03 will be the first full year that the extension to the original
Measure B ½ cent sales tax will be in effect, resulting in additional funds for City street
maintenance and improvements.
Passage of State Proposition 40 (State Park Bonds) and Proposition 42 (set aside of gasoline
sales tax for street projects and maintenance). Monies from the issuance of the new State Park
Bonds will not be made available to the City until Fiscal Year 2003-04. Proposition 42 guarantees
that, in the future, the City will continue to receive Traffic Relief and Congestion Funds (TRCF)
from the State, first received by the City in Fiscal Year 2000-01.
Impact of the projected State Budget Deficit - The State is facing a multi billion dollar deficit for
Fiscal Year 2002-03, and as a result, is seeking to reduce its eXpenditures in a variety of programs.
The largest potential impact to the City would result if the State opts not to fund the "backfill" that is
currently used to reimburse cities for the 67.5% reduction currently being made on auto registration
fees. If the reduction is not eliminated and if the State decides not to fund this backfill, the City
'could potentially lose over $1 million in General Fund revenue.
Delays and Reductions in New Development - The loss of Oracle, Cisco and Commerce One
office projects and delays in the Transit Center residential project will result in the loss of
Development Impact Fees. This will result in the need to defer some impact fee dependant capital
improvements (i.e. Parks and Recreation Facilities and Roadways) beyond the time frames identified
in the 2001-2005 Capital Improvement Program. The loss in Public Facility Impact Fees alone for
the above projects will result in approximately $14.7 million fewer dollars during the time frame of
the CIP.
Attachment 1
EXPENDITURES
Identified below are items that are anticipated to impact the City's expenditure budget for Fiscal Year 2002-
2003. This analysis does not include inflationary increases associated with materials, supplies, equipment,
or the increased costs of wages for City employees and/or most contract providers.
Full Year Funding of Personnel - Several City Departments carried vacancies for part of the
current fiscal year, including the City Manager's Office, the Planning Division and thc Parks and
Recreation Department. It is expected that these positions will be fully staffed for all of Fiscal Year
2002-03, resulting in increased personnel costs.
Carryover of Capital Projects From Fiscal Year 2001-02 - As mentioned in the Mid Year Report
presented to Council, approximately $2.3 million in proposed Capital Project expenditures is
expected to be carried over into Fiscal Year 2002-03. This includes funding for the Library and
Energy Projects, the Utility Undergrounding, the Freeway Underpass Art and the new Senior Center.
Police Services - For Fiscal Year 2001-02, the Alameda County Deputy Sheriff's Association
received a salary increase of approximately 8% mid-year and is expected to receive an additional
increase of up to 8% in Fiscal Year 2002-03 as a result ora salary survey performed by the County.
Legal Services - Additional costs for legal services could materialize if a lawsuit is filed in regards
to the proposed property annexation in Eastern Dublin.
Fire Station - The General Fund will be required to loan funds to the Fire Impact Fee Fund for the
construction of the Emerald Glen Fire Station. It is also anticipated that Fire Station 18 (Dublin
Ranch) will be opened in the Summer of 2003. This will necessitate hiring nine new fire personnel
in the Spring of 2003 to begin training.
Street Maintenance - It is anticipated that the City will experience additional street maintenance,
sweeping, landscape maintenance, tree maintenance and signal maintenance costs associated with
new infrastructure that is being completed in the City.
New Park and Library - Additional costs will be incurred as a result of a full year of maintenance
associated with Ted Fairfield Park and with six months of maintenance and operational costs of the
new Library, expected to open in January 2003.
H:XBudget\CHARTSLANALYSIS OF ANTICIPATED FUTURE IMPACTS.doc
ATTACHMENT 2
BACKGROUND HISTORICAL TRENDS
INFORMATION / TRENDS
Ao
B.
C.
D.
E.
Historical Comparison of General Fund Operating Revenue Versus Expenditures
Comparison of Total General Fund Revenues
Actual Trends for Major General Fund Revenues
Ail General Fund Expenditures
Capital Project Expenditures in General Fund
$4O
$35
$30
O
'.=_- $25
$2O
$15
$10
HISTORICAL COMPARISON OF GENERAL FUND
OPERATING REVENUE VERSUS EXPENDITURES
(Includes CIP Project Expense and Civic Center Debt Service Payments)
1996-96
1996-97
1997-98
1998-99 1999-00 2000-01 2001-02
Revenue ~ Expenditures
Actual Actual Actual Actual Actual Actual
1995-96 1996-97 1997-98 1998-99 1999-00 2000-01
Revised
Budget
2001-02
REVENUES $ 15,853,776 $ 17,438,474 $ 20,894,763 $ 24,051,679 $ 30,673,893 $ 37,263,474 $ 36,645,561
EXPENDITURES $ 14,350,242 $ 15,429,391 $. 18,044,611 $ 20,987,641 $ 21,916,166 $ 25,001,837 $ 35,894,572
3/28/"2002 10:47 AM
h:\Budget~charts\REV&EXP
ATTACHMENT 2A
$36
$3o
$26
$20
$1o
$6
$o
$16.9
COMPARISON OF TOTAL GENERAL FUND REVENUES
Last Seven Fiscal Years
$37.3
$17.4
$20.9
$24.1
$30.7
$36.6
1996-96 1996-97 1997-98 1998-99 1999-00 2000-0t 2001-02
Revised
Actual Actual Actual Actual Actual Actual Budget
REVENUES 1995-96 1996-97 1997-98 1998-99 1999-00 2000-01 2001-02
Property Taxes $ 3,867,613 $ 3,9201897 $ 4,351,859 $ 4,866,093 $ 5,991,814 $ 7,174,290 $ 8,258,100
Sales Tax 6,760,413 7,108,598 8,025,448 8,687,091 11,548,901 12,985,985 13,200,000
Other Taxes 865,612 1,128,454 1,297,452 1,522,356 2,142,704 2,899,168 2,739,830
Licenses & Permits 466,199 1,092,183 1,398,677 2,472,217 3,897,965 3,028,655 2,957,140
Fines & Forfeitures 38,793 38,492 40,421 60,876 84,543 106,234 102,000
Interest and Rentals 1,265,255 1,388,949 1,556,181 1,352,939 1,340,737 2,626,837 1,787,578
Intergovernmental 1,102,494 1,151,275 1,233,812 1,356,234 1,632,441 2,006,116 1,948,150
Charges For Services 1,372,959 1,386,419 2,483,861 3,482,983 3,308,263 3,719,568 4,773,691
Other Revenue* t 13,782 ,223,207. 507,052 250,889 726,524 ,2,71,6,~62.1' ..... 87,9,97.,2.,,,
TOTAL REVENUE $15,853,1213 $ .17,438,47,4.. . $ 20,894,763,.. $ 24,051,678. ~ 30,673,89.2.... $ 37.,.263.,474 $ .36,(M5,561,.
ANALYSIS:
After experiencing revenue growth between FY 1995-96 through 2000-01, Staff is projecting a leveling off of growth in FY 2001-02. It is
important to note the categories which contributed significantly to the revenue growth (Sales Tax, PropertyTax, Charges for Services and
Licenses and Permits) in the prior Fiscal Years. "Licenses and Permits" and "Charges for Services" are largely related to Development Activity.
These revenues directly offset current operating costs. Both of these revenues are highly related to external economic factors. The 2001/02
Budget also includes $879,000 in "Other Revenue" which typically is from one-time / non recumng sources.
Date Printed: 3/28t2002 10:45 AM ATTACHMENT 2B
h:~UDGET~CHARTS\HSTREV
ACTUAL TRENDS FOR MAJOR GENERAL FUND REVENUES
Last Seven Fiscal Years
$14
$12
$10
$8
$2
$0
t995-96
1996-97 1997-98 1998-99 19994)0 2000-01 2001 4)2
-411-Property Taxes -e-Sales Tax -a-Licenses and Permits -e--Charges For Services
REVENUES
Sales Tax
% General Fund Total
Properly Taxes
% General Fund Total
Licenses and Permits
% G-encral Fund Total
Charges For Services
% G-~eral Fund Total
% Total Major Categories
ANALYSIS:
Date Printed: 3/28FZ002 10:58AM
h:\BUDGE~TS~MAJREVCM
Actual Actual Actual Actual Actual Actual
1995-96 1996-97 199 %98 1998-99 1999-00 2000-01
Revised
Budget
2001-02
$ 6,760,413 $ 7,108,598 $ 8,025,448 $ 8,687,091 $11,548,901 $ 12,985,985 $ 13,200,000
42.6% 40.8% 38.4% 36.1% 37.7% 39.7% 36.0%
$ 3,867,613 $ 3,920,897 $ 4,351,859 $ 4,866,093 $ 5,991,814 $ 7,174,290
24.4% 22.5% 20.8% 20.2% 19.5% 22.0%
$ 466,199 $ 1,092,183 $ 1,398,677 $ 2,472,217 $ 3,897,965 $ 3,028,655
2.9% 6.3% 6.7% 10.3% 12.7% 9.3%
$ 1,372,959 $ 1,386,419 $ 2,483,861 $ 3,482,983 ~ $ 3,308,263 $ 3,719,598
8.7% 8.0% 11.9% 14.5% 10.8% 11.4%
78.6% 77.6% 77.8% 81~ 1% 80.7% 82.4%
This chart analyzes four major General Fund Revenues which account for approximately 80% of the total General Fund Revenues collected.
$ 8,258,100
22.5%
$ 2,957,140
8.1%
$ 4,773,691
13.0%
79.6%
ATTACHMENT 2C
$40
$35
$30
$25
.~$20
$15
$10
$5
$14.4
$15.4
ALL GENERAL FUND EXPENDITURES
(Operating Expenditures / CIP / Debt Service)
$18.0
$21.0
$21.9
$25.0
1995-96 1996-97 1997-98 1998-99 1999-00 2000-01
$35.9
2001-02
General Government
Public Safety
Transportation
Health & Welfare
Culture & Leisure
Community Development
Contingent Reserve
TOTAL OPERATIONS
Capital Improvement Program
Net Debt Service
GRAND TOTAL
ANALYSIS:
Date Printed: 3/28/2002 11:07AM
h:\BU DGE'I'~CHARTS\G FEXP
Actual Actual Actual Actual
1995-96 1996-97 1997-98 1998-99
$ 1,496,978 $ 1,691,687
$ 6,714,808 $ 6,723,854
$ 691,337 $ 629,264
$ $ 15,596
$ 1,847,110 $ 2,000,560
$ 1,778,244 $ 1,838,558
N/A N/A
$ 12,528,477 $ 12,899,519
$ 322,243 $ 1,033,056
$ 1~499,522 $ 1,4962816
$ 14,350,242 $ 15,429,391
$ 1,761,643 $ 2,139,738
$ 8,204,545 $ 8,805,457
$ 650,709 $ 776,929
$ 17,039 $ 16,969
$ 2,168,994 $ 2,248,580
$ 2,761,133 $ 3,606,401
N/A N/A
$ 15,564,063 $ 17,594,074
$ 987,200 $ 1,779,159
$ 1,493~348 $ 1,61,4,,407
$ 18,044,611 $ 20,987,64o
The chart displays General Fund expenditures by major program area.
Revised
Actual Actual Budget
1999-00 2000-01 2001-02
$ 2,274,915 $ 3,085,725 $ 4,064,896
$ 9,485,166 $ 10,401,808 $ 11,767,464
$ 827,142 $ 959,762 $ 1,127,147
$ 19,086 $ 13,483 $ 64,495
$ 2,827,621 $ 3,332,421 $ 4,345,294
$ 4,116,030 $ 4,526,076 $ 5,594,915
N/A N/A $ 145,872,,.
$ 19,549,960 $ 22,319,275 $ 27,110,083
$ 2,366,207 $ 2,682,562 $ 8,777,489
$ - $ - $ -
$ 21,916,167 $ ,25,001,837 $ 3~,887,572
ATTACHMENT 2D
CAPITAL PROJECT EXPENDITURES IN GENERAL FUND
Last Seven Fiscal Years
$9
$8
$7
~ $6
~ $4
$2
$I
$0
$03
$1.0
$1.0
1995-96 1996-97 1997-98
$1.8
$2.4
1999-2000
1998-99 2000-01
$8.8
2001'02
Capital Improvement Program
Actual Actual Actual Actual Actual Actual
1995-96 1996-97 1997-98 1998-99 1999-2000 2000-01
$ 322,243 $ 1,033,056 $ 987,200 $ 1,779,159 $ 2,366,207 $ 2,682,562
Revised
Budget
2001-02
$ 8,777,489
ANALYSIS:
In the last four Fiscal Years the General Fund has funded Capital Improvement Projects to a greater extent
than in prior years.
Date Printed: 3/28/2002 11:09 AM
H:\BUDGE~Charts\GFEXP
ATTACHMENT 2E
REVISED AS OF 3/25/02
SUMMARY 2000-2005 CAPITAL IMPROVEMENT PROGRAM - GENERAL
PROJECT NUMBER AND NAME
93130 City Cablecast System
93150 Network System Upgrade
93155 Senior Center Computer System
93157 Engineering Printer, Copier, Scanner
93172 Fuel Tank Upgrade
93190 Central Data Processing System Upgrade
93192 Geographic Information System
93200 Automated Building Permit System
93220 Communications System Upgrade
93310 Computers for Our Schools Project
93320 Telecommunications Plan
93325 Automated Notification System
93401 Senior Center Housing Evaluation
93450 Civic Center Library
93460 Civic Center Trailer Annex
93510 Emerald Glen Fire Station
93511 Fallon Fire Station
93910 Civic Center Modification Design Services & Construction
93915 Civic Center Automatic Door
93916 ADA Building Conformance Upgrades
93921 Civic Center Painting
93930 Civic Center Roof Replacement
93935 HVAC Renovation - Civic Center
93936 Civic Center Electrical Upgrade
93970 Automated Document Storage & Retrieval System
94500 Public Facility Fee Study Update
94510 Fire Fee Study Update
TOTAL COST
FINANCING
General Fund (001)
Criminal Activity Fund (200)
Public Facility Impact Fee (310)
Fire Impact Fee Fund (320)
Affordable Housing / Noise Mitigation (380)
Internal Service Fund (832)
TOTAL FINANCING
3/28/2002 10:52 AM
PRIOR
TOTALS YEARS 2000-2001 2001-2002
$ 0 $ 0 $ 0 $ 125,000
242,903 191,785 32,618 18,500
23,510 23,510
42,000 42,000
9,750 36,243
141,443 62,845 33,218 56,829
125,029 4,529 19,000 108,820
53,676 14,953. 13,673 25,050
159,059 18,340 32,219 35,500
349,541. 149,541 100,000 100,000
46,201 13,581 32,620
41,154 41,154
26,250 26,250
16,957,760 359,005 2,012,469 11,131,505
22,650 28,650
5,104,334 22,894 657,500 3,420,796
3,768,800 2,444,224
3,819,738 2,009,353 140,635
18,750 18,750
23,150 23,150
95,730 95,730
178,386 100,224 78,162
75,563 35,673 21,090
15,000
9,021 9,021
1,348,060
20,000
18,800
15,000
2002-2003 2003-2004 2004-2005
$ 0 $ 0 $ 0
82,500
4,143,482
1,003,144
1,324,576
132,250 1,537,500
$ 31,349,398 $ 2,982,723 $ 3,233,019 $ 19,152,727 $ 6,553,702 $ 132,250 $ 1,537,500
$ 8,071,391
!7,266
14,352,336
8,882,155
26,250
$ 31,349,398
$ 970,705 $2,287,959 $ 6,095,010 $ 770,490 $ 0 $ 0
.17,266
1,971,858 278,539 6,976,697 3,455,492 132,250 1,537,500
22,894 666,521 5,865,020 2,327,720
26,250
189,750
$ 2,982,723 $ 3,233,019 $
19,152,727 $ 6,553,702 $ 132,250 $ 1,537,500
ATTACHMENT 3
SUMMARY 2000-2005 CAPITAL IMPROVEMENT PROGRAM - GENERAL
PROJECTS UNFUNDED DURING THE FIVE YEAR TIME FRAME
PROJECT NUMBER AND NAME
93450 Civic Center Library (Part II)
TOTALS
UNFUNDED
PORTION OF
ESTIMATED
COST
$1,108,390
$1,108,390
3/25/2002 5:04 PM
REVISED AS OF 3/25/02
SUMMARY 2000-2005 CAPITAL IMPROVEMENT PROGRAM - COMMUNITY IMPROVEMENTS
PROJECT NUMBER AND NAME
94051
94060
94192
94226
94230
94250
94252
94255
94290
94615
94641
94701
94956
94960
New
TOTAL
Iron Horse Trail Amenities
Downtown Improvement Implementation - Phase I
Dougherty Road Tree Planting
Freeway Underpass Art at Dublin Boulevard & Amador
Valley Boulevard
Arroyo Vista Project Improvements Roof Repair
Sidewalk Safety Repair
Bus Shelters
Sidewalk Reconstruction Underneath 1-680 on Dublin
Boulevard & Amador Valley Boulevard
Audible Pedestrian Signals
Village Parkway Median Landscaping - Dublin Boulevard
to Amador Valley Boulevard
Irrigation Controller Upgrade
Downtown Improvement Implementation Plan
Street Banner Art Project
Street Name Identification Sign Replacement Program
City Entrance Sign Modifications
COST
FINANCING
General Fund (001)
State Gas Tax (206)
Community Development Block Grant (209)
Stagecoach Landscape Assessment District (711)
Dougherty Lighting and Landscape District (713)
TOTAL FINANCING
PRIOR
TOTALS YEARS 2000-2001 2001-2002 2002-2003 2003-2004
$ 16,994 $ 8,208 $ 8,786 $ 0 $ 0
1,096,400 651,750 444,650
31,733 31,733
423,000 44,600 297,608 105,794
195,997 115,497 38,500 42,000
353,651 73,128 77,273 67,750
118,500 42,500 76,000
88,510 88,510
32,825 2,120 5,605 25,100
40,975
16,737
43,802
50,258
30,929
59,700
16,737
43,802
2,500
30,929
3,750 37,225
50,258
59,700
2004-2005
$ 0 $ 0
67,750 67,750
$2,600,011 $ 125,825 $ 296,320 $ 1,278,749 $ 791,119 $ 67,750 $ 67,750
$2,275,629 $ 8,208$ 207,153 $ 1,198,376 $ 753,894 $ 67,750 $ 67,750
102,609 36,534 28,850 37,225
219,254 117,617 50,114 51,523
804 804
1,715 1,715
$ 2,600,011 $ 125,825 $ 296,320 $ 1,278,749 $ 791,119 $ 67,750 $ 67,750
3/25/2002 11:35 AM
REVISED AS OF 3/25/02
SUMMARY 2000-2005 CAPITAL IMPROVEMENT PROGRAM - PARKS
PROJECT NUMBER AND NAME
95110
95405
95451
95501
95560
95565
95600
95635
95640
95830
95851
95910
95911
95913
95930
95935
N/A
N/A
Community Gymnasium at Valley High School
Shannon Park & Community Center Parking Lot Paving
Shannon Center Doors
Heritage Center Storage Building
Murray School Bell Tower
Murray Schoolhouse Improvements
Emerald Glen Park
Park Play Area Evaluation
Dublin Ranch Neighborhood Parks
Dublin Sports Grounds Renovation
Sports Park
Dublin Swim Center Deck Replacement
Dublin Swim Center Exterior Painting & Fence Replacement
Dublin Swim Center Roof Replacement
Senior Center
Community Theater
Emerald Glen Park Aquatic Center
Emerald Glen Park Recreation Center
TOTAL COST
FINANCING
General Fund (001)
State Park Bond Act (213)
Measure D (224)
Traffic Impact Fee Fund (300)
Public Facility Impact Fee (310)
Park Dedication In-Lieu Fund (315)
TOTAL FINANCING
PRIOR
TOTALS YEARS 2000-2001 2001-2002 2002-2003
$ 1,029,011 $ 502,545 $ 275,462
81,265 81,265
21,655
79,025 13,250
105,150
8,625
20,683,621 7,095,452 283,779
3,600 3,600
1,368,405
1,199,407 215,454
100,000
804,757 775,336 29,421
91,642 10,807 80,835
86,990
3,318,510
85,000
2,036,485
5,793,080
$ 251,004 $ 0
890
21,655
78,775.
66,490 38,660
8,625
1,031,009 1,188,585
86,935 915,220
542,728 300,225
75,000 25,000
86,990
164,105
'85,000
2003-2004
2004-2005
$ 0 $ 0
8,220,535
366,250
141,000
1,504,925 t,649,480
170,400 512,405
455,770 1,481,735
$ 36,896,228 $ 8,599,594 $ 767,612 $ 2,499,206 $ 4,598,785 $12,371,405
$ 665,863
389,628
21,491
3,155,055
1,353,680
3,855,575
$ 4,435,825 $ 1,289,554 $ 483,833
389,628
41,930 20,439
164,465 164,465
21,961,792 4,849,773 283,779
9,902,588 2,275,363
$ 8,364,310
$ 360,985 $ 1,649,480 $ 0
1,277,944 3,937,575 3,539,205
144,280 300,225 7,182,720
$ 36,896,228 $ 8,599,594 $ 767,612 $ 2,499,206 $ 4,598,785 $ 12,371,405
8,364,310
$ 8,364,310
3/25/200211:34 AM
SUMMARY 2000-2005 CAPITAL IMPROVEMENT PROGRAM - PARKS
PROJECTS UNFUNDED DURING THE FIVE YEAR TIME FRAME
PROJECT NUMBER AND NAME
95600
95640
N/A
N/A
N/A
N/A
N/A
N/A
N/A
Emerald Glen Park
Dublin Ranch Neighborhood Parks'
Community Theater
Sports Park
Emerald Glen Park Aquatic Center
Emerald Glen Park Recreation Center
Eastern Dublin Neighborhood Parks
Emerald Glen Park Community Center
Schaefer Ranch Neighborhood Parks
TOTALS
LESS AVAILABLE PARK DEDICATION AND PUBLIC
FACILITY FEES
FUNDING SHORTFALL
UNFUNDED
PORTION OF
ESTIMATED
COST
7,565,570
7,665,770
3,419,000
44,133,220
195,850
557,920
18,081,200
5,037,001
8,540,660
$ 95,196,191
$ 2,741,437
$ 92,454~754
3/25/2002 11:38 AM
REVISED AS OF 3/25/02
SUMMARY 2000-2005 CAPITAL IMPROVEMENT PROGRAM - STREETS
PROJECT NUMBER AND NAME
TOTALS PRIOR YEARS 2000-2001 2001-2002 2002-2003 2003-2004 2004-2005
96010
96015
96021
96023
96080
96380
96400
96410
96420
96430
96560
96561
96562
96563
96564
96575
96580
96585
96650
96770
96772
96850
96852
96870
96890
96920
96930
N/A
N/A
N/A
N/A
Dublin Boulevard - Silvergate Drive to Hansen Drive
Amador Valley Boulevard & Starward Drive
Bedford Court Subdrain
Hansen Drive Drainage Improvements
Dublin Boulevard Underground Utilities - Village Parkway To
1-580 & San Ramon Road Freeway Interchange Improvements
Eastern Dublin Arterial Street Improvements
1-580 & Hacienda Drive Freeway Interchange Improvements
1-580 & Tassajara Road Freeway Interchange Improvements
1-580 & Fallon Road Freeway Interchange Improvements - Phase I
Traffic Signals - Village Parkway at Brighton, Tamarack and
Traffic Signal - Hacienda Drive at Summerglen Drive
Green LED Traffic Signal Conversion
Traffic Signal at Dougherty Road and Willow Creek Road
Traffic Signal Upgrade - Village Parkway / Amador Valley
Village Parkway U-Turn Lane At Davona Drive
Annual Street Overlay Program
Annual Slurry Seal Program
Eastern Dublin Street Right-of-Way Acquisition
Alamo Canal Bike Path Project - Amador Valley Boulevard to Iron
Horse Trail Connection
Alamo Canal Bike Path - Iron Horse Trail to 1-580
Dougherty Road Improvements - North of Amador Valley Boulevard
to North of Houston Place
Dougherty Road Improvements - Houston Place to 1-580
Saint Patrick Way - Regional Street to Golden Gate Drive
Dublin Boulevard Widening - Dougherty Road to Scarlett Drive
Dublin Boulevard Improvements - Village ParkwaY to Sierra Court
Dublin Boulevard Improvements - Sierra Court to Dougherty Road
Bike Path - Alamo Creek North of Amador Valley Boulevard
Village Parkway & Lewis Avenue Intersection Improvement
Dublin Boulevard - Right Turn at Village Parkway
Bike Lane - Amador Valley Boulevard Stagecoach Road to
Dougherty Road
TOTAL COST
$ 719,976 $ 719,976$ 0
31,548 31,548
18,505 18,505
85,676 85,676
600,000 4,160 21,620
1,672~575 84,002 160,620
13,210,438 492,702 93,022
1,772,970 203,259 1,569,711
14,341,645 1,060,453 547,220
8,435,177 781,738 459,677
542,002 39,468 ~502,534
96,725 96,725
122,241 122,241
182,250
127,000
148,465
3,767,211 47,422
482,000
4,452,946 78,519 4,311,107
385,700 50,487 160,263
375,768 42,430
570,269
5,921,653
6,786
3,055,846
3,931,682
2,138,609
150,289
87,048
520,150
230,430
$ 68,183,580
570,269
$ 0 $ 0
36O
461
316,803 269,900
228,988 1,269,200
2,338,156 7,414,372
181,103
8,121,768 4,612,204
2,708,662 4,703,762
19,350 162,900
11,000 116,000
148,465
1,741,289 659,500
120,500 120,500
63,320
249,950
2,745 333,338
72,500 60,047
6,786
148,760 600,767 2,052,702
142,816 346,460 2,856,550
3,547,578
715,850
150,289
87,048
$ 0 $ 0
1,644,453 1,227,733
659,500 659,500
120,500 120,500
2,255,400
970,664 1,167,945
520,150
230,430
$ 4,383,395 $ 9,290,048 $ 21,222,219 $ 24,162,441 $ 6,170,667 $ 3,406,108
3/25/2002 11:20 AM
PROJECT NUMBER AND NAME
FINANCING
General Fund (001)
State Gas Tax (206)
ISTEA (210)
Transp. Development Act (211)
Measure B Sales Tax (217)
State Transportation Improvements (219)
SB300 Grant (220)
Transportation Fund for Clean Air (221)
Traffic Congestion Relief Fund (240)
Traffic Impact Fee Fund (300)
SUMMARY 2000-2005 CAPITAL IMPROVEMENT PROGRAM - STREETS
TOTALS PRIOR YEARS 2000-2001 2001-2002 2002-2003 2003-2004
$ 2,205,044 $ 79,429$ 351,918 $ 818,240
2,721,452 142,426 133,897 866,835
2,344,804 285,044 393,760 1,047,750
65,125 10,349 32,988
1,199,365 94,807 21,798 391,260
2,970,000 83,746 303,747 2,144,026
69,340 69,340
261,080
482,513 294,470
55,864,857 3,618,254 8,051,940 15,659,638
2004-2005
$ 520,159 $ 49,500 $ 242,930
662,967 437,319 437,319
693,250
21,788
230,500 230,500 230,500
470,000
261,080
62,681 62,681
21,240,016 5,390,667
62,681
2,432,678
$ 68,183,580 $ 4,383,395 $ 9,290,048 $ 21,222,219 $ 24,162,441 $ 6,170,667 $ 3,406,108
3/25/2002 11:20 AM
SUMMARY 2000-2005 CAPITAL IMPROVEMENT PROGRAM - STREETS
PROJECTS UNFUNDED DURING THE FIVE YEAR TIME FRAME
PROJECT NUMBER AND NAME
UNFUNDED
PORTION OF
ESTIMATED FEES NET
COST AVAILABLE SHORTFALL
96010 Dublin Boulevard - Silvergate ])rive to Hansen Drive $ 2,327,115 $ 37,861 $ 2,289,254
96400 Eastern Dublin Arterial Street Improvements 58,355,186 58,355,186
96850 Dougherty Road Improvements - North of Amador Valley
96870
N/A
Boulevard to North of Houston Place
Saint Patrick Way - Regional Street to Golden Gate Drive
Dougherty Road Improvements - Amador Valley Boulevard
North to City Limits
Scarlett Drive Iron Horse Trail Extensions
Tri-Valley Transportation Development Fee Regional
Transportation Projects
4,030,280 56,999 3,973,281
4,673,428 1,546,324 3,127,104
N/A
N/A
3,736,935 268,376 3,468,559
8,321,777 154,658 * 8,167,119
18,973,465 18,973,465
TOTALS $ 100,418,186 $ 2,064,218 $ 98,353,968
* Does not include an estimated $4.5 million in Measure B funds and $216,000 in construction costs incurred by Alameda County.
3/25/2002 11:39 AM
BUDGET ISSUES WORKSHEET
FISCAL YEAR 2002-2003
/?
OPERATING EXPENDITURES
1.A. The City Council adopted a level of service for each Budget Activity (i.e., Police, Park
Maintenance, Library, etc.) in Fiscal Year 2001-2002 (See 2001-2002 Preliminary
Budget).
For the purpose of developing the Fiscal Year 2002-2003 Operating Budget, should the
service levels adopted in the 2001-2002 Budget be used as the starting point (i.e., base
level of service)?
YES or NO (Please circle one)
If you circle "NO" what service modification or new programs would you like to see
added or dropped from the base level of service?
ADDED SERVICES
DROPPED SERVICES
1.B.
To the extent the City Council's 2002-2003 Goals & Objectives require additional
resources not included in the current budget, should the 2002-2003 Budget fund only
High Priority Objectives?
YES or
NO (Please circle one)
-1-
ATTACHMENT 4
1.C.
COMMUNITY GROUP FUNDING REQUESTS
During Fiscal Year 2001-2002, the City funded a number of commUnity groups which
are identified below. Please indicate with a check (,/') which community groups
should be included in the base level or in a higher service level of the Fiscal Year
2002-2003 Budget.
2001-2002 Higher
Funding Base Level Level
Communi .ty Group Level* of Service of Service
Alameda County Green program $ 1,500
Bay Area Buy Recycled Paper $ 1,000
Childcare Links Childcare Support $15,000
Classical Philharmonic Schools $10,000
Program
Dublin Fine Arts Foundation $46,000
Drag Substance Abuse Council
Red Ribbon Week $ 3,500
Dry Grad Night $ 2,500
Dublin Partnerships in Education $10,000
Emergency Services Network of $ 1,000
Alameda County
Service Corp of Retired Executives $ 400
(scom~)
Tri-Valley Convention & Visitors $65,024
Bureau
Th-Valley One-Stop Career Center $10,000
Th-Valley Visioning Program $25,000
* The 2002-03 requested funding level maY differ from 2001-02.
In addition to the groups identified above, Staff has already received funding requests
from two groups which were not funded in 2001-2002. Please indicate with either
YES/NO if the City should, evaluate funding requests from the following two
groups.
Should City
Evaluate Subsidy
for FY 2002-2003
(Yes/No)
Drowning Prevention Foundation
($50,000 requested for 2002-03)
Th-Valley Corrections Internship Program
($10,000 requested for 2002-03)
-2-
Attachment 3 (see attached) is a summary of the capital improvements adopted as part
of the City's Five-Year C.I.P. as revised.
Of those projects currently identified in the Five-Year C.I.P., are there any projects
which you would like to see funded in Fiscal Year 2002-2003? If so, please indicate
below.
2.8.
In the 2001-2002 Budget (as adjusted), a total of $8,777,489 was allocated from the
General Fund for Capital Projects.
If this funding is necessary for Operating Expenditures in 2002-2003, which of the
following alternatives do you prefer for funding Capital Projects in 2002-2003?
Please check preferred method.
1. Defer 2002-2003 Capital Projects to a later year.
2. Utilize unallocated Reserves.
3. Utilize Debt Financing.
4. Other
CONTRACT SERVICES
The following service contracts are scheduled to' be evaluated at the end of Fiscal Year
2001-2002. Are you interested in Staff evaluating any aspect of the service other than
the cost of providing the service for Fiscal Year 2002-2003? If so, please indicate
below.
If "Yes"
CONTRACT Cost Only Identify
(Yes/No) Other Issues
A. Building & Safety
1) Linhart Petersen Powers & Assoc.
2) BJY Associates
3) 4 Leaf
B. Crossing Guard Services (All City Management)
C. Maintenance Services (MCE)
D. Fire Services (Alameda County)
E. Street Sweeping (A-1 Enterprises)
-3-
RESERVES
The City's policy on use of reserves (see Attachment #5) establishes appropriate use for
these funds.
A. Currently funds are not reserved for future costs associated with:
1. Future major renovation of existing facilities, i.e., Shannon Center, Civic
Center, etc.
2. Unfunded furore Capital Projects which are not to be fully funded by
Development Impact Fees.
3. Catastrophic losses (i.e., City currently does not have property damage
protection due to earthquake).
Should the City consider reserving funds for any of the above items (4A 1-3)? If
so, please indicate which items below.
B. Should use of Reserves be limited to Capital or other one-time expenditures?
YES or
NO (Please circle one)
5. BUDGET CALENDAR
In order to finalize the budget calendar for preparation of the 2002-2003 Budget and Five-
Year C.I.P. update, it is necessary to establish a budget hearing date.
In order to provide Staff with enough time to complete the budget, Staff would recommend
that the Council identify a day during the week of June 24, 2002 as the Budget Hearing date.
Please indicate preferred date below.
G:\CC-MTGS~2002-qtr2~PRIL\4-3-02g&o\att4-budget study.doc
-4-
RESOLUTION NO. 80 - 93
A RESOLUTION.'OF THE CITY COUNCIL
OF THE CITYOF DUBLIN
ESTABLISHINGA POLICY FOR. MANAGEMENTANDUSE 0FGENERALFUNDASSETS
WHEREAS, the City Council of the City of'Dublin recognizes the
importance'of General FUnd Reserves; 'and
WIIE~, General Fund Reserves are an important asset of the City
and it is prudent to have an established policy to guide their use; and
WHEREAS., typically, General Fund monies are a discretionary funding
source which can be appropriated as enacted through-the annual budget
process; and
WHEREAS, interest earnings from City General Fund Reserves can
provide an independent local revenue source; and
~, it is not possible to exactly predict over time how
economic'conditions may impact either the interest earnings (income) or
the need to utilize reserves to provide the level of municipal services
deemed adequate by City Council policy; and
WHEREAS., prudent.management would dictate that the City have a
general policy for the management of its assets, including the
anticipated purpose of General Fund Reserves.
NOW, Tw~T~EFOF~, BE IT RESOLVED Ghat the City Council of' the CitYof
Dublin does hereby establish the attached Policy for the Management and
Use of General Fund Reserves. (Exhibit A), attached hereto and by
reference made a part hereof.
BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED that City Staff are hereby 'authorized and
directed to undertake all administrative steps necessary to implement
said "Policy'.' and present periodic reports to. the C~ty Council.
PASSED, APPROVED AND ADOPTED. this 14th daY of June, 1993.
AYES
Councilmembers Burton,.Houston, Howard, and Mayor Snyder
NOES: .None
ABSTAIN:
PSR/]~S a: ResoS0.~ge~a~]2:
Councilmember Moffatt
ATTACHMENT 5
E~n~IBIT /%
CITY OF DUBLIN
'GENERAL FUND P~ESERFE. POLICY
PURPOSE ':
The purpose of this document is to formally' outline the city council
policy - of maintaining General Fund Reserves and' designating the
potential types of uses for such reserves. General Fund Reserves
shall not be considered as being readily available for appropriations
towards operating expenses, except as allowed for in this policy and
through, explicit action by the City Council.
A_MOUNT oF RESERVES
The amount of General Fund. Reserves Will fluctuate over time. The.
city Council recognizes that there are numerous events which could
place a legitimate demand on the reserves.
INTEREST EARNINGS
Ail interest earnings on the General Fund Reserves shall accrue to the
City's. General Fund Unreserved Fund Balance, for appropriation by the
City Council in accordance with local and State laws,' regulations and
policies.
ABiLiTY TO ACCO.~94ODATE CITY NEEDS
The City. Council recognizes the importance of maintaining flexibility
at this time as well as in the future. Proper maintenance of the
city's General Fund Reserves will accommodate a response to economic
conditions 'affecting earnings on said funds as well as unanticipated
events which require an appropriation.
PO%~ENTIAL USE OF RESERV'ES
Any appropriation of General Fund Reserves is subject to action by the
City Council. The fol!6wing events are the basis for a policy to
protect and carefully plan for any expenditure from General Fund
.Reserves:
City Indebtedness: Reserves may be utilized to reduce or.
eliminate the need for current or future debt service payments.
The limitation of debt service as an annual operating expense
allows for available monies to be expended for other public
purposes. This shall be considered the highest priority for the
use of General Fund Reserves.
Economic Uncertainty: A prudent reserve can be used to finance
municipal services in the event that economic conditions have
deteriorated to the extent that traditional revenue sources can
no longer support the services.
Response to Reductions in Revenues:' In recent years, State
Government has taken revenues which were previously considered to
be local revenues. Development of a locally controlled 'revenue
source can be important.-- '~
Catastrophic Loss: The city currently 'participates in a pooled
self-insured liability and .property program. A catastrophic
event may require additional appropriations in order to attain a
full recovery.
Preservation of Funds as Revenue. Generator: The preservation of
General Fund Reserves provides revenue as a result of investment
income. This is an important 'discretionary income source.
Economic Development Stimulus:' A locally controlled funding
source could become one cOmponer~t of an investment plan, which
would provide a positive return to the City and a public benefit.
This listing is not intended to be '~11 inclusive; however, it ix
generally reflective of the types of considerations to .be made when
proposing the use of such funds. Proposed uses which are inconsistent
with this policy should demonstrate a public benefit and a finding
that it is in the best interest of the City.
_~JiS IONS
Revisions to this policy shall be approved by the city Council in the
form of a Resolution.
PSP.//ss a: FundEx~e,. agenda#l 2
4125 Mohr Ave., Suite K · Pleasanton, CA 94566 · 925417-2040
Th-Valley Connections
TVCIP
Internships Program
March 6, 2002
Richard C. Ambrose
City Manager
City of Dublin
100 Civic Plaza
Dublin, CA 94568
Dear Mr. Ambrose:
About four months ago, an exciting new pilot program was launched through a
partnership of local high schools, local businesses, Las Positas College (LPC), the Tri-
Valley ROP and the Tri-Valley One-Stop Career Center. The project, called Tri-Valley
Connections Internships Program (TVCIP), offers students hands-on work experience
that makes classroom learning relevant and provides an invaluable opportunity for career
exploration. A major benefit to local business is that the program offers a one-stop
resource for hiring "job ready" students. Before applying for internships, students
complete an Internship-Preparedness course through LPC.
Once the Internship-Preparedness course is completed, the student can apply for quality
internship opportunities that will be developed by TVCIP. During the internship,
students will not only be monitored by a work-site supervisor, but a field-supervisor from
LPC will also work to ensure that the internship is successful for both the business-
partner and the student. In the Pilot Program, the first round of students will apply for
internships in the summer of 2002.
The TVCIP Pilot Program is supported by the Dublin Unified School District and local
Dublin business. Dr. John Sugiyama, Superintendent of Dublin Unified School District,
resides on the Tri-Valley Educational Collaborative (TEC) Administrative Council, the
executive team overseeing TVCIP. Representatives from Dublin High School also
assisted in the design and structure of the program. The program is located at the Tri-
Valley One-Stop Career Center, and has access to the relationships that have already been
established with Dublin businesses.
While funding for TVCIP's Pilot Program is secured through June 2002, further financial
support is needed to preserve and grow this exciting and important program. We are
requesting $10,000 for the purpose of serving the students and businesses in the City of
Dublin.
ATTACHMENT 6
We appreciate your consideration, and look forward to working with the City of Dublin.
We have attached a budget breakdown to this letter. If you have any questions, feel free
to reach us at (925) 417-2040.
Thank You,
Rebecca Kopchik
Internship Coordinator
Tri-Valley Connections Internships Program
4125 Mohr Avenue, Suite K
Pleasanton, CA 94566
JeffBaker
Director
Tri-Valley One-Stop Career Center
4125 Mohr Avenue, Suite K
Pleasanton, CA 94566
Th-Valley Connections Internships Program
Budget: November 2001-June 2002
Salary, Internship Coordinator
Marketing Expenses
Out-of-Pocket Expenses (milage, phone, etc.)
Total Budget
$36,000
$6,000
$1,200
$43,200
Budget: July 2002-June 2003
Tri-Valley Connections Internships Program is working to secure funding for the 2002-2003
fiscal year and will submit this budget as soon as it is available.
DROWNING
PREVENTION
FOUNDATION
Board of Directors
Nadina Riggsbee
Executive Director, Founder
Drowning Prevention
Foundation
Byron Y. Aoki, M,D.
Director of Pediatric I.C.U.
Kapiolani Medical Center
Honolulu, Hawaii
Lee D. Baxter
Western Regional Director, Retired
U.S. Consumer Product
Safety Commission
Mary Glass
Drowning Prevention Foundation
Orange County
William S. Gonda, M.D.
American Academy of Pediatrics
Accident Prevention Committee
Suzanne Guyette
Manager of News &
Public Affairs
KBHK TV, Channel 44
Nancy King
Aquatic Safety Educator
Drowning Prevention Foundation
Eldorado County
Gerald L. Kroll
Attorney
Los Angeles County
John W. Schieffelin, M.D.
Kaiser Permanente Hospital
American Academy Pediatrics
Accident Prevention Committee
Roger Trent, Ph.D., Chief
Injury Surveillance &
Epidemiology Unit
Department of Health Services
Sacramento
Timothy Yeh, M.D.
Director of Pediatric
Intensive Care Unit
Children's Hospital
Oakland
RECEIVED
March 5, 2002
Mayor & City Council Members
City of Dublin
100 Civic Plaza
Dublin, CA 94568
iVlAR 0 6 ZOOZ
CiTY OF DUBLIN
Dear Mayor & City Council Members:
I am writing to request financial support for the Drowning Prevention
Foundation's (DPF's)Kids Aren't I)rownproof Educational Program in the
City of Dublin.
Drowning has remained the leading cause of death among California toddlers for
the last decade, responsible for more child deaths than motor vehicle crashes,
childhood diseases or child abuse.~ Isn't it a travesty that children needlessly
continue to die from injuries that are totally preventable?
Research has found that the three prongs of a good injury prevention strategy
include a combination of education, engineering and enactment (or enforcement).
One prong of drowning prevention in California (enactment) is the Swimming
Pool Safety Act of 1997, AB 3305 sponsored by DPF, which requires that new
pools constructed after January 1, 1998 meet specific, new barrier requirements.
One or preferably a combination of four barrier types (engineering) must be
installed to isolate the pool from the house before the pool is filled with water.
These barriers are 1) a five foot fence that completely surrounds the pool; 2) door
alarms on all doors that allow direct access to the pool; 3) self-closing, self-
latching mechanisms on all doors that lead to the pool area; and/or 4) a pool cover
meeting ASTM standards.
With the passage of the Swimming Pool Safety Act AB 3305, DPF launched a
comprehensive statewide educational program to inform pool contractors and
potential pool owners about their responsibilities for complying with the barrier
requirements. To accomplish this endeavor, DPF joined hands with the California
Children's Coalition for Safety & Health (I chair the Drowning Prevention
Committee), the California Drowning Prevention Network and various Building
Code Officials throughout the state in developing an educational packet that would
be given to future pool contractors/owners at the time the pool permit is issued.
Since Dublin is considered a very special and desirable place to live and work, and
because of this, there is and will continue to be a substantial amount of growth
during the next several years especially in the number of homes with swimming
pools. The key to preventing drownings from occurring in this high-risk area lies
in the implementation of effective drowning prevention programs/strategies.
DPF's history of effectively working together with EMS, Regional Centers,
Fire/Health Services Departments and other community groups on drowning
prevention projects throughout California sets the stage for us to successfully
address the problem of drowning in Dublin.
ATTACHMENT 7
P.O. Box 202 · Alamo, CA 94507 · (925) 820-SAVE (7283) · Fax (925) 820-7152
PROPOSAL NARRATIVE
TIlE INJURY PROBLEM
The magnitude and seriousness of the child drowning and near-drowning problem is enormous.
In addition to the incalculable human cost of these tragic deaths, near drownings result in
expensive emergency medical responses and stays in intensive care units. Costs range from
about $3,000 for a child who recovers fully to $144,000 for a child with severe brain damage.
The California Department of Developmental Services spends over $10 million of tax dollars
each year for the care of near drowning victims. This includes in-patient care for 77 child near
drowning victims at an annual cost of $168,000 each. Another 295 nearly drowned children are
cared for in their homes or community facilities.
Studies repeatedly show that most toddler drownings take place in residential/public swimming
pools, spas, bathtubs, and even in five-gallon buckets containing water. The victim most
commonly opens a door leading to the pool and drowns before being missed. Drowning children
never cry out; they slip into the water and die in a few minutes. The child is often believed to be
in the house, even napping, when he gets into the pool. The victim's parents usually have taken
precautions to protect the child from the pool, but the child gets into the pool while caretakers are
doing routine household tasks like washing dishes or answering the telephone, believing that the
child is indoors and safe.
The U. S. Consumer Product Safety Commission, in a study of baby bath seat submersion
incidents involving children from 5 to 20 months, learned that 78 babies have drowned while
using baby bath seats. In many of the deaths, the bath seat tipped over, generally because the
suction cups did not adequately adhere to the tub surface. Some deaths occurred when the
baby's body slipped through the leg holes of the bath seat and the head got trapped.2
Based on the information gleaned from the Consumer Product Safety Commission's study and
because of the high incidence of drownings associated with baby bath seats, educating the public
about the dangers of baby bath seats has become a priority for DPF over the next few years.
ORGANIZATION BACKGROUND AND CAPABILITY
The goal of the Drowning Prevention Foundation (DPF), a 501(c)(3) organization established in
1985, State of California, is to reduce the incidence of drowning and near-drowning accidents in
children under the age of five. DPF encourages individuals and organizations to develop and
implement child drowning prevention programs and projects in their communities and also offers
technical assistance and counseling on an as-needed basis.
Since its founding, DPF has been in the forefront creating national public awareness to the
drowning and near-drowning problem by providing local, state, and national agencies with
drowning prevention methods, policies, and supporting statistics. It has also developed and
maintained a network registry and resource center of ongoing prevention activities, educational
materials, and epidemiological studies.
2
The most effective preventive strategies call for the removal of the hazard. However, a~ 7
recognizing that this is not always practical, other strategies aimed to reduce childhood
immersion incidents must be implemented. Epidemiological data repeatedly shows that
intervention strategies that combine legislative mandates and a strong community-based
educational campaign to promote and encourage the use of pool barriers/constant supervision are
the most effective. While AB 3305 addresses all new pools, there remains the tremendous
challenge to reach pool owners in a state where there are more than 1 million existing pools.
Further, because of the high incidence of drownings associated with residential/public
swimming pools, bathtubs and spa drownings, it is imperative that a comprehensive educational
undertaking be launched now to supplement our existing educational program.
DESCRIPTION OF THE PROJECT
Since the primary drowning prevention strategy is public awareness and effective
implementation of legislation, we are requesting $ 50,000 to support this Educational
Campaign to Prevent Drowning of Young Children in the City of Dublin.
This campaign is a three-pronged educational project targeting -
Parents and caretakers of toddlers with existing pools and
· Parents and caretakers of children between 5 and 20 months.
Its goal is to prevent drowning of young children from residential swimming pools, bathtubs and
spas. The objectives of the Campaign are:
1)
To print and distribute 100,000 Kids Aren't Drownproof educational brochures for
distribution to school districts in Dublin. Teaming up with the PTA, our brochure would
be included in a safety packet and sent home to all parents of the targeted elementary
school districts.
2)
To print and distribute 100,000 Baby Bath Seat brochures for distribution to various
school districts in Dublin. Teaming up with the PTA, our brochure would be included in
a safety packet and sent home to all parents of the targeted elementary school districts.
3)
To produce a CPR mining video, which would be used by various community service
personnel (i.e. firemen/paramedics and child safety educators, etc.) as a tool to instruct
parents and students on how to perform CPR.
(PROJECT I) EDUCATIONAL AWARENESS PROGRAM
Our Kids Aren't Drownproof brochure succinctly conveys that constant supervision of children
around water is paramount to prevent drowning even if barriers are in place and that the most
effective drowning prevention strategy is to implement layers of protection. For example, a child
may slip away from his/her caretaker for a few moments and head for the pool. Each layer or
barrier device, such as a child proof door latch, and isolation fencing around the pool, used in
combination, delay the child's gaining access to the pool, hopefully for the additional few
3
seconds necessary for the parent to notice that the child is missing.
Teaming up with the Building Code Official, Fire Department, PTA, Kiwanis and Rotary Club,
arrangements will be made to distribute our educational safety kits to school districts in Dublin.
These kits will be comprised of a letter of introduction from DPF, a Swimming Pool Safety
Checklist, our Kids Aren't Drownproof and Baby Bath Seat brochures, and pool safety product
information. Representatives at these school districts will coordinate this endeavor and insure
that these educational safety packets are sent home to parents of elementary students. The City
of Dublin's name and logo will appear as a sponsor on all DPF's materials in the packets.
(PROJECT II), Printing & Distribution of Baby Bath Seat Brochures
The Product - Baby bath seats (or infant bath seats or bath rings as they are also known) are
consumer products intended to assist in bathing infants by holding the infant in a sitting position
in a full size bathtub. These products usually have suction cups to hold them in place in the
bathtub and a plastic seat with leg openings to secure the infant in a sitting position while being
bathed. With a bath ring (used for the same purpose), the infant sits directly on the tub surface or
on a mat attached to the legs of the bath ring.
Baby bath seats have very limited utility. They are not recommended for use until 6 months of
age and when the child can sit upright unassisted. Once an infant can pull up or attempt to stand
while holding onto objects, baby bath seats should be discontinued, since the infant could climb
from the seat. The current standard for childhood development (i.e., the Denver Developmental
Screening Test) indicates that infants begin attempts to pull themselves up to a standing position
between 7 and 9 months of age. This time interval indicates that bath seats have a useful product
life of approximately 2 months.
Hazards Presented by Baby Bath Seats - Baby bath seats pose an unreasonable risk of injury
and death to children. Each year babies die as a result of drowning associated with bath seat use.
Additionally, infants who experience "near miss" incidents may experience traumatic injuries.
Drownings typically occur when the infant tips over, climbs out of, or slides through the product.
In cases where the bath seat tips over, it is believed that the seat may contribute to the drowning
because the child is unable to get free of the seat and/or the parent or caregiver is unable to
extricate the child from the seat. Two deaths were reported to the Consumer Product Safety
Commission (CPSC) where the caregiver witnessed the event but was unable to free the child
from the seat.
Caregivers using bath seats prepare baths with deeper water and are more likely to leave a child
unattended. There is a false sense of safety that is propagated by having a mechanical aid to
"help" to hold a slippery baby upright.
There are currently 78 incidents of drowning and 37 reports of near drowning identified by
CPSC staff. In the first six months of 2000 alone, five babies died in bath seat incidents. Recent
research findings suggest that the inherent design of bath seat products induce a "false sense of
security. This "sense of security" leads to increased risk-taking behavior among those using the
product.
4
As the result of these alarming statistics, the Drowning Prevention Foundation joined hands with
eight other consumer and safety organizations and petitioned the U. S. Consumer Product Safety
Commission (CPSC) to ban infant bath seats. Citing continued deaths and a deadly
misperception by parents and caregivers regarding the product's safety, we asked CPSC to take
action.
Most parents and caregivers expect that they will be alerted to any drowning danger by the
baby's distress cries. Most people beheve that they will be alerted to someone drowning by cries
for help or splashing and gasping by the victim. This is not true for drowning incidents
involving infants and toddlers. Water, in the airway, blocks any effective sound from being
heard and can cause tracheal constriction, which fully blocks the airway, and incapacitates the
infant. Within moments, brain damage occurs followed by death after 4-5 minutes. Drowning is
truly a silent and speedy event.
This research demonstrates that parents and caregivers must be made aware &the dangers of
these baby bath seats. Our Baby Bath Seat brochure succinctly conveys this message.
Teaming up with the Building Code Official, Fire Department, PTA, Kiwanis and Rotary Club,
arrangements will be made to distribute our Baby Bath Seat brochures to school districts, day
care centers, pre-schools, pediatric waiting rooms and hospital maternity wards throughout the
City of Dublin.
(PROJECT Ill) CPR VIDEO
PROJECT PURPOSE
In an effort to further decrease the incidence of young children from drowning, DPF would like
to produce a CPR training video. Various community service personnel (i.e. firemen/paramedics
and child safety educators) would use this video as a tool to instruct young children on how to
perform CPR on others.
PROJECT SCOPE
The scope of services needed to complete an estimated 7 to 10 minute video includes
collaborating with Edward G. Royce, Royce Multimedia, Inc., 1124 Main Street, Suite B, Irvine,
CA 92614, on the following-
· Developing script for videotaping
· Coordinating one (1) day of production to obtain appropriate video footage
· Editing of footage, graphics, animation, music and narration into the final video
presentation
· Transferring the video program onto an edited master in preparation for VHS
duplication
5
ESTIMATED PROJECT TIMELINE
The completed video master is estimated to be completed in-
Pre-Production
Production
· Post-Production
Edited Master
PRODUCTION PROCESS
The video production services and process required to complete this project will be contracted
with Edward R" ROyce, Royce Multimedia, Inc. and are as follows:
L Pre-Production (Project Coordination)
· Establish communication and approval process with the appropriate persons.
· Coordinate one (1) day of production to obtain video footage
· Coordinate production crew, equipment, and supplies
· Casting for / On-camera Talent / Advisors / Instructors
· Design graphics / Animation for the CD
· Scout location for videotaping
Il. Production (Videotaping)
Estimated one (1) 8 - 10 hour day of videotaping at designated location.
IH. Video Production Crew
· Producer/Director- Ed Royce, Royce Multimedia
· Videographer-Royce Multimedia
· Lighting/Sound Technician- ROYCE Multimedia
· Grip- ROYCE Multimedia
· On-Camera Talent
· Drowning Prevention Foundation project coordinator
6
me
Production Equipment
Beta SP video camera package
· Lighting/Grip packages
· 30-minute Beta SP videotape stock
· Appropriate supplies and props based on the script
· Production Insurance
IV. Post Production (Video/Auditing Editing)
· Use digital equipment for computer editing
· Log footage to be used for the video modules
· Transfer videotape footage on to hard drives
· Select music, graphics and narrator
· Edit rough cut
· Revise for final approval
PROJECT DELIVERABLES (What DPF will own and receive)
· One (1) Beta SP edited master of the completed CPR training video
· One (1) CD master
· Computer graphics and animation created for the video
· Source footage videotaped for the project
PROJECT BUDGET FOR CPR VIDEO
$15,000.00
SPECTRUM OF PREVENTION
The foregoing projects are preventative programs that will promote community education, foster
lasting behavioral change, as well as promote effective implementation of AB 3305. They respond
directly to the documented needs of young children and families in Dublin and throughout the Bay
Area Counties.
7
Through the work of Board Members, staff, and volunteers, these projects would complement the
current drowning prevention efforts throughout the targeted areas and strengthen the collaborative
efforts of the Health Services Department and various other community groups and coalitions. Our
history of effectively working together on other drowning prevention projects sets the stage for us to
successfully address the problem of drowning in the targeted regions.
Our past successes and accomplishments are the result of professionalism and dedication by Board
Members and staff and testify to DPF's effectiveness. Board members, who actively participate in
the workings of DPF, bring expertise in the field of consumer product safety, law, medicine,
epidemiology, education, public relations, marketing and business administration.
Staffmg is supplemented through the work of 5 to 10 volunteers who dedicate their energy to one or
more of the many aspects of DPF. With these qualifications, staff members, and volunteers, DPF's
programs have excelled, gained wide recognition, and as a result have attracted outstanding local
and state support to the Foundation.
The Drowning Prevention Foundation's programs are designed to save lives. The foregoing
worthwhile projects will absolutely have an effect on reducing toddler deaths due to drowning.
Children deserve our protection. Death should not be the result of a parent being absent for a
moment. By combining constant supervision and a variety of barriers to form layers of
protection, parents and caregivers can give their children the protection they deserve.
It is hoped that City of Dublin will provide financial support to DPF for these worthwhile
endeavors. With your help DPF will continue to target and reduce the widespread problem of
childhood deaths and disabilities from residential/public swimming pools, bathtub and spa
drownings.
If you have any questions or need additional information, please call me via phone or message at
(925) 820-7283.
Regards,
California Department of Health Services, California Morbidity Monthly Report, 1995
CC~
Mr. Richard C. Ambrose
City Manager
City of Dublin
100 Civic Plaza
Dublin, CA 94568
8
DPF'S EDUCATIONAL CAMPAIGN
*'KIDS AREN'T DROWNPROOF - SAVE A CHH.D'S LIFE PROJECT"
CITY OF DUBLIN
JULY 2002 TO JUNE 31, 2003
SALARIES
Executive Director
Managing Director
Project Coordinator
6,800
4,550
Subtotal all salaries
11,350
Fringe Benefits ~ 20%
PROFESSIONAL FEES
Evaluator/Statistician
Legal & Accounting Services
TOTAL PERSONNEL COSTS
11,350
NON-PERSONNEL EXPENSES
Insurance
Rent ($900/mo. util.incld.)
Telephone ($500/mo.)
Equipment Purchase: ---
Computer/Printer
FAX Machine
Maintenance
Equipment Repair
Supplies for Educational Packets
Postage, Shipping & Handling
Printing & Copying
Books & Publications
Development of CPR Video
Travel Expenses
Danville to Sacramento (3 trips)
Danville/Oakland/to
Southern California (2 trips)
3,280
19,420
15,000
950
Bay Area Travel
Statewide Conferences
Volunteer Training Expenses
TOTAL NON-PERSONNEL EXPENSES
$38,65o
GRAND TOTAL ALL EXPENSES $ 50,000
DROWNING PREVENTION FOUNDATION
TOTAL ANNUAL INCOME
2001
Private Donations
Corporate Donations
City of San Ramon
Annual Fundmiser
Golf Tournament Fundraiser
Kiwanis of San Ramon
Contra Costa County Pool Permit Fee
Kids Plate
Junior League, San Francisco
Junior League, Oakland
Citibank
18,250
37,000
10,000
65,750
43,000
1,500
20,000
6,000
5,000
5,000
3,000
TOTAL REVENUE
214,500
TOTAL ANNUAL EXPENSES
2001
EXPENSES
Fundraising Expenses
Directors Salary
Salaries
Medical Insurance
Rent (400 square fL ~ $3.00 sq. ft. per month)
Printing
Postage/Supplies
Travel
Telephone
Payroll Taxes/Benefits
Office Expenses
4,800
60,000
51,500
4,200
14,400
29,335
12,800
3,150
3,225
23,400
2,840
TOTAL 209,650