HomeMy WebLinkAboutNB02-Parks and Recreation
I
. .
err" OF SAN BERNARDP."~O - REQU"'''~T FOR COUMCIL At JON
From: Annie F. Ramos, Director
Subject:
Approval of proposal by City to State
Parks and Recreation Department for
negotiating a new operating agreement for
Seccombe Lake State Urban Recreation Area.
Dept: Parks, Recreation & Community Services
Date: October 2, 1985
Synopsis of Previous Council action:
NONE
Recommended motion:
That the City's Proposal for negotiating a new operating agreement for Seccombe
Lake State Urban Recreation Area, as written in the attached letter to the State
Department of Parks and Recreation, be approved and the Parks, Recreation ald Community
Services Department Director be authorized to forward said letter to State Parks
and Recreation Department.
d(7~
Signatu re
Contact person: Annie F. Ramos
Supporting data attached: Staff Report and Letter to State
Phone: 383-5030
Ward:
2
FUNDING REQUIREMENTS:
Amount:
Source:
Finance:
Council Notes:
7~.0262
Agenda Item No. NEIl BUSINESS
....i, ,,__1 ~I..
crt ... ~ OF SAN BERNARDSO - REQUC,T FOR COUNCIL AG ION
STAFF REPORT
In approving the 1985-86 State Budget the Governor included a veto message relevant
to funding the Seccombe Lake State Park project which reads as follows:
"I am approving the reappropriation of Item 3790-301-722 (25), Budget Act of
1984, as propcrsed in Item 3790-490 category 722 (4.5), Seccombe Lake SURA, in an
amount not to exceed one million dollars. I am reserving the remaining $2,176,000
of the appropriation and would support legislation to reappropriate this balance
for development at Seccombe Lake, provided that all operational responsibilities
and costs for this facility are reassumed by the City of San Bernardino or another
non-state agency."
The $1,000,000 reappropriated by the Governor to be released now for the completion
of Phase lA are contingent upon the State Finance department giving final approval to
the change of scope plans submitted by the city.
This process is in motion with an estimated time for construction to begin on those items
remaining in Phase lA between April or May 1986.
In addition, as a result of that veto & several meetings with State staff, the city
submitted the following proposal to the State which provided the conditions under which
the State could withdraw from its previous maintenance commitments:
-A 10% per year phasing withdrawal of the State's commitment to maintain,
protect, control & operate the park (excluding law enforcement costs), beginning
with the first full year of the completed park.
At the end of the first 10 years the state would be completely relieved of
responsibility for those costs.
-All revenues would go to the city to offset maintenance costs. To provide
additional revenue opportunities, parcels 10,11,12,13, & 14 be taken out
of the development plans and turned over to the City.
-At the end of the second 10 year period the entire park would be transferred
to the City.
After reviewing the City's proposal the State submitted the following counter proposal
to the Ctiy:
1. The City of San Bernardino would recEive any and all revenue generated by the park,
effective immediately upon approval of a new operating agreement.
2. The State shall transfer Parcels 10, 11, 12 and 18 in fee title tofue City on
the effective date of the agreement. Parcel 13 would be transferred upon release
of Land and Water Fund obligation (approximately 6-9 months time delay).
3. During the first five years of this agreement, the State's liability costs for the
park's operation and maintenance will decrease 20 percent per year and thereafter be
zero. At that time, the entire park would be transferred to the City.
4. The State's condemnation proceedings ,concerning parcel 14 will be re-evaluated
with the Attorney General handling the case. There is a concern that the possible
acquisition cost may exceed the available funds, which would necessitate an abandonment
of the suit. In the event that Parcel 14 is not part of the park, its use for
commercial purposes would enhance the commercial potential of the parcels being
turned over to the city.
75-0264
-
\.
October 2, 1985
Staff Report
Seccombe Lake SURA
page 2
-",.,,,,",,
"-.~'"
The decision is now the City's whether to agree to the Sta~'s counter proposal
or submit to the Sete the following counter-counter proposal:
1. The City of San Bernardino would receive any and all revenue generated by
the park, effective immediately upon approval of a new operating agreement.
(Same as State proposed).
2. The State shall transfer Parcels 10, 11, 12, and 18 in fee title to the City
on the effective date of the agreement. Parcel 13 would be transferred upon
release of Land and Water Fund obligation (approximately 6-9 month time delay).
(Same as State proposed).
3. During the first five years of this agreement, the State's liability
costs for the park's operation and maintenance will decrease 10 percent per year.
At the end of the first five years the remaining 50% would be dropped, thus
releasing the State from liability costs for the Park's operation and maintenance.
At that time, the entire park would be transferred to the City.
4. The State's condemnation proceedings concerning Parcel 14 would be abandoned
and the remaining acquisition funds would be redesignated for use in development
of Phase lb.
This department recommends that the above counter-counter proposal be submitted to the
State Parks and Recreation Department. A letter for the Mayor's signature is
attached and will be forwarded upon approval.
JUSTIFICATION FOR PLACEMENT ON THE SUPPLEt1ENTAL AGENDA
In order to meet a deadline for abandoning the condemnation proceedings
concerned with Parcel 14, it is imperative that the State be notified of City's
position by October 8th; therefore, action needs to be taken at the October 7th
meeting of the Mayor and Common Council.
,
"'.....
......",
',""\
CITY OF SAN BERNARDINO
300 NORTH '"0'" STREET, SAN BERNARDINO, CALIFORNIA 92418
1714) 383-5133
EV~YNWI~COX
Mayor
OFFICE OF THE MAYOR
October 4, 1985
Mr, Les McCargo
Chief Deputy Director
P.O. Box 2390
Sacramento, CA 95811
Dear Mr. McCargo:
Thank you for your letter of September 6, 1985, in which you outlined a
counter-proposal to the City's proposed terms for negotiating a new
operating agreement for Seccombe Lake State Urban Recreation Area. Your
counter-proposal has been reviewed by staff and members of the Common
Council of the City as well as myself and a counter-counter proposal
is hereby offered.
The City agrees with the first two points of your proposal, however,
modification of points 3 and 4 are offered. The City's proposal is:
1, The City of San Bernardino would receive any and all revenue
generated by the park, effective immediately upon approval
of a new operating agreement.
2. The State shall transfer Parcels 10, 11, 12, and 18 in fee
title to the City on the effective date of the agreement.
Parcel 13 would be transferred upon release of Land and Water
Fund obligation (approximately 6-9 month time delay).
3. During the first five years of this agreement, the State's
liability costs for the park's operation and maintenance will
decrease 10 percent per year. At the end of the first five
years the remaining 50% would be dropped, thus releasing the
State from liability costs for the Park's operation and
maintenance. At that time, the entire park would be transferred
to the City.
4. The State's condemnation proceedings concerning Parcel 14 would
be abandoned and the remaining acquisition funds would be
redesignated for use in development of Phase lb.
It is realized that point four, if agreed to by the State, will reduce
the park size by approximately 4.2 acres. The City will review the devel-
opment plan and have new working drawings and specifications prepared when
7J N,;!
~ ;"
-.\1
.
(:
"
",,",
'-"
........
Mr. Les ~1cCargo
October 4, 1985
page 2
notification is received and funding is released to do so.
I look forward to your response to this proposal. It is imperative that
both the State and City move most expeditiously to bring this project
to completion. Please call my office, (714) 383-5051, if you wish to
discuss this proposal further.
Sincerely,
Evlyn Wilcox, Mayor
EW:mg