Interlocal & Other Agreements: Various City-County Projects

 

Topic/Building

Documents

Key Arrangements

Issues for Discussion

Emergency Communications

Interlocal Agreement

(dated 12-28-94) approved by City Resolution 5677 and Douglas Cty Resolution 94-67.

1994 Agreement – City to pay 66%, County to pay 34% of all operating expenses.  ECC personnel shall be County employees.

Is this an appropriate breakdown?  Should other municipalities participate?  Where does 911 surcharge money go to?  Is that split?  Does it all go to the County?

Fire & Medical Services

Interlocal Agreement

(dated 12-16-96)

1996 Agreement – City shall pay 74% of the total department budget, County pays 26%.

City and County to budget separately for capital expenditures.

County to fund all expenses related to the provision of ambulance services within the County, including the City.  County to be responsible for 100% of building and maintenance buildings for ambulance purposes.

City responsible for 100% of all fire services within the City and all capital expenses.

Is this an appropriate breakdown?

Health Department

Interlocal Agreement (dated 2-21-95)

 

Interlocal Agreement (dated 11-15-96) approved by City Resolution 5829 and Douglas Cty Resolution 96-39.

 

1978 Agreement

1995 Agreement – both parties agree to share 50% of the costs of design and construction.  City to own buildings upon completion of construction.  1996 agreement just concerns financing/escrow for construction.

City & County each pay 50% of the maintenance & operation costs of the health facility.

Health Department – City pays 40% of operating expenses, County pays 60%.

 

1978 Agreement had provided for a 50% split for renovation of the 1956 hospital wing for County Health Bld. & Bert Nash use.

 

 

 

Building is occupied by Lawrence-Douglas Cty. Health Dept., Bert Nash and Visiting Nurses Assoc.  Are there lease agreements with these entities?  Are there maintenance agreements in place?  One page document found dated 9/13/99.  Janitorial service arrangements unclear.

Judicial Law Enforcement Center – LEC

 

Bld. Sq. footage 87,096

 

City to have 10,000 sq. ft. = 11.5%

Contract (dated 8-17-71)

 

Resolution 3919 (adopted 7-10-73)

 

CC on 8/30/74 added another $93,750. (minutes)

 

Cooperation Agreement (dated 1-27-99) (document notes City is only using 6,025 sq. ft exclusively)

 

Lease for parking arrangements dated 7/25/85.

From Contract - City will pay 28% of construction & maintenance costs (site and building), County to pay 72%. Agreement in force for 25 years.  City will own an undivided 28% interest in the building.

 

From Res. 3919 - City to provide $500,000 in Federal Revenue Sharing Funds for the construction of the LEC.  City would receive exclusive use of 10,000 sq. ft. of space for the life of the building plus storage space and police car parking (see letter dated 6-28-73).  City would also pay its pro-rata share of the building maintenance annually.

Douglas County acquired the land for the site.

Under cooperation agreement dated 1-27-99, City would expend $30,000 to equip and furnish newly renovated jury assembly room.

We own 28% of the building but only using less than 10%??

Is the City still using 10,000 sq. feet of space?  What documentation do we have?

Do maintenance costs match the % of space we occupy?  (1999 space breakdown) (1st quarter 2007 invoice) City seems to pay 15% of maintenance and custodial workers & 25% of building insurance.  No agreements regarding how these % came to be? How much space does the City exclusively have?

Need to update cooperation agreement (mun. ct. no longer in LEC).

Planning – Lawrence-Douglas County Metropolitan Planning Dept.

Ordinance 3951  (adopted 4-1-69) section V provides that the County will fund 1/6 of the budget.

Douglas County pays 1/6 of the cost of the City’s planning department = 16.7%.

Does 1/6 accurately cover the resources and workload devoted to county planning issues?