HomeMy WebLinkAbout04/19/2011, B 3 -counci lj aGen6a uepoRt Meeting Date
April 19, 201 1
Ite.0 Nu.nber 3
C I T Y O F S A N L U I S O B I S P O
FROM :
Deborah E . Linden, Chief of Polic e
Prepared by Sean K. Gillham, Patrol Sergeant
SUBJECT : INTRODUCTION OF NIGHTTIME CURFEW ORDINANC E
RECOMMENDATION :
Introduce an ordinance adding Chapter 9 .50 to the San Luis Obispo Municipal Code prohibitin g
minors under 18 years of age from being in public places from 11 :00 P .M . to 5 :00 A .M . dail y
unless engaged in certain types of activities (Nighttime Curfew).
DISCUSSIO N
Background
Nighttime curfew ordinances for minors under 18 years old have been used effectively in man y
communities to help deter and curb criminal activity and delinquent behavior by unsupervise d
youth . The ordinances provide parents with a tool to reinforce their home curfew rules and
provide law enforcement with the legal ability to detain a minor and return them home befor e
they are caught engaging in criminal behavior. Generally, the ordinances apply to public place s
and areas and contain a number of exceptions for minors who are engaged in activities which ar e
lawful or under adult supervision .
The City of San Luis Obispo does not have a nighttime curfew for minors under 18 years of age .
The County of San Luis Obispo and the remaining six cities — Arroyo Grande, Atascadero ,
Grover Beach, Morro Bay, Paso Robles, and Pismo Beach — all have nighttime curfews, as do th e
adjoining counties of Santa Barbara, Monterey, Fresno, and Kern, along with their respectiv e
cities .
Staff researched the nighttime curfew ordinances in 25 cities and counties, including those liste d
above . In most jurisdictions, violations of the ordinance were an infraction (the lowest level o f
violation). The hours varied, with most beginning curfew at either 10 :00 p .m . or 11 :00 p .m . an d
ending at 5 :00 a .m . or 6 :00 a .m . Some ordinances extend the hours to midnight on weekends .
The proposed nighttime curfew would be in effect from 11 :00 p .m . to 5 :00 a .m . daily and woul d
prohibit minors under 18 years of age from being in public places unless they are engaged i n
activity that is exempt from the ordinance. Currently, minors under 18 can legally be out i n
public at any hour and police officers cannot legally detain the minor unless reasonable caus e
exists to believe the minor is engaged in criminal activity .
INTRODUCTION OF NIGHTTIME CURFEW ORDINANCE Page 2
Juveniles Contacts and Crim e
The following table depicts the number of times minors were contacted in the City of San Lui s
Obispo for either being a suspect in criminal activity, a victim of a crime, or other reason (such a s
a runaway or missing person) between 10 :00 p .m . and 6 :00 a .m . (one hour before and after th e
proposed curfew ordinance since incidents may overlap the curfew hours). The table also depict s
the number of minors under 18 years of age who were actually arrested for criminal charge s
during curfew hours .
Year Contacts 10 :00 p .m .-6 :00 a .m .Arrests 11 :00 p .m .-5 :00 a .m .
2006 112 2 6
2007 98 3 3
2008 98 1 8
2009 78 2 3
2010 69 20
Many of the arrests were for alcohol violations ; however some minors were arrested for ver y
serious crimes including a 15 year old male in 2009 who was arrested for burglary and sexua l
assault, and two boys, ages 12 and 13, who were arrested in 2005 for murder .
Access by minors to alcohol and drugs in our community is of particular concern due to the larg e
number of privately hosted parties, especially on weekend nights. Many of these gatherings ar e
hosted by local college students and have little or no controls in place over who attends . Each
year, intoxicated minors become victims of crimes, including sexual and physical assault ; require
medical treatment for alcohol overdose and related injuries ; commit crimes in our community ;
and drive while intoxicated . For example, during a two-week period in March/April 2011, tw o
14-year old minors were found so intoxicated in public places in the City that they require d
medical treatment. The impacts of, and perceptions about, underage drinking are measured ever y
two years through the California Healthy Kids Survey of students at the seventh, ninth, an d
eleventh grade levels . The following chart depicts responses by ninth and eleventh grade hig h
school students in the San Luis Coastal Unified School District to several alcohol and dru g
related questions asked in the 2009/2010 survey :
Alcohol Use by 11th Grade Students Grade 9 Grade 1 1
Used alcohol ever 35%63 %
Used alcohol within past 30 days 19%35 %
Drunk or sick from alcohol 19%43 %
Binge drank (5+ drinks in 1 setting) in past 30 days 11%25 %
Drove car after drinking 18%25 %
Used alcohol or drugs ever 40%65 %
Used alcohol or drugs within past 30 days 23%44 %
Gotten high from drugs 20%43 %
Used marijuana ever 21%46 %
Perceive alcohol is easy to obtain 63%76 %
Perceive marijuana is easy to obtain 50%75 %
INTRODUCTION OF NIGHTTIME CURFEW ORDINANCE Page 3
Proposed Ordinanc e
The proposed nighttime curfew ordinance would prohibit minors under the age of 18 (17 year s
old or younger) from being in a public place or establishment open to the public in the City o f
San Luis Obispo between the hours of 11 :00 p .m . and 5 :00 a.m . daily,unless the minors are :
1.Accompanied by their parent or guardian, or by a responsible adult ;
2.On an errand at the direction of their parent or guardian, or a responsible adult ;
3.In a motor vehicle involved in interstate travel ;
4.Engaged in an employment activity, or going to or returning from an employment
activity ;
5.Involved in an emergency ;
6.On the sidewalk abutting the minors' residence ;
7.Attending, or going to or from, an official school, religious, or other recreational activit y
supervised by adults and sponsored by the City of San Luis Obispo, a civic organization ,
or another similar entity that takes responsibility for the minor ;
8.Exercising First Amendment rights protected by the United States Constitution ;
9.Emancipated pursuant to law ;
10.Going to or returning from any private place, without detour or stop ;
11.Going to any of the activities listed above from a private place, or going from any of th e
activities to a private place .
Nighttime curfew ordinances containing these exceptions have withstood legal challenges so it i s
important to retain these exceptions in any version of the ordinance adopted by the Council . The
ordinance would provide police officers the authority to contact a minor in a public place wh o
appears to be under 18 years of age during curfew hours and, if the minor is found to be i n
violation, return the minor to his/her parent/guardian in order to help ensure the minor's safety .
Prior to taking any enforcement action, officers would be required to ask the minor his/her ag e
and reason for being in a public place in order to determine if a curfew violation has occurred .
Public place means any place to which the public or a substantial group of the public has acces s
and includes, but is not limited to, streets, highways, parks, and the common areas of schools ,
hospitals, office buildings, local transportation facilities, and shops .
A violation of the ordinance would be an infraction punishable by a fine and/or communit y
service (served during a time other than the minor's hours of school attendance or employment )
as follows :
1 St offense :
$100 fine and/or 10 hours of community servic e
2nd offense :
$200 fine and/or 20 hours of community servic e
3 `d (or more) offense : $250 fine and/or 25 hours of community service
Any parents or guardians who knowingly permit their minor child to violate the curfew coul d
also be charged with an infraction punished by a fine and/or community service as follows :
1 "offense :
$100 fine and/or 10 hours of community servic e
2nd offense :
$250 fine and/or 25 hours of community service
INTRODUCTION OF NIGHTTIME CURFEW ORDINANCE
Page 4
3 rd (or more) offense : $500 fine and/or 50 hours of community service
The City Attorney also has the authority under the Municipal Code to charge violations a s
misdemeanors for repeat and chronic offenders .
CONCURRENCE S
In order to get feedback about the proposed ordinance, Police Chief Deborah Linden met wit h
San Luis Coastal Unified School District Superintendant Dr . Eric Prater to discuss the ordinance .
Dr . Prater distributed an information bulletin to the presidents of the parent-teacher association s
(PTA) in the district . In addition, Chief Linden attended a meeting of PTA Presidents to discus s
the ordinance . Those in attendance were supportive of the ordinance, especially as a tool to hel p
support parents in their efforts to reinforce home curfew rules . Feedback included the importance
of informing parents and their children about the new ordinance and the need to contact parent s
when a minor is issued a citation and ensure they get home safely . In addition, Residents fo r
Quality Neighborhoods (RQN) has expressed support for the ordinance .
FISCAL IMPAC T
There are no direct general fund impacts associated with this action . Enforcement of th e
ordinance would occur during police officers' normal work shifts .
ALTERNATIVE S
1.Modify the proposed ordinance .Simple modifications, such as to the curfew hours or fin e
amounts, can be made by staff upon Council direction at the City Council meeting . If th e
Council desires more substantial modifications to the proposed ordinance, the Counci l
should express what modifications are sought and direct staff to return with propose d
revisions for Council consideration. Substantive modifications to the exceptions outline d
in the ordinance are not recommended since the exceptions are necessary to ensure th e
ordinance is legally defensible if challenged .
2.Decline to adopt the proposed ordinance .Should the Council decide not to adopt th e
proposed ordinance, the Police Department would continue its current practice of contacting
minors when they are suspected of committing crimes (or are victims, runaways, etc).
ATTACHMENTS
1.Ordinance adding Chapter 9 .50 to the City of San Luis Obispo Municipal Code .
2.Curfew ordinance comparisons .
T :\Council Agenda Reports\Police CAR\201 I\Nighttime Curfew Ordinance\Introduction of Nighttime Curfew 4-19-I I .DOC
ATTACHMENT 1Ordinance No .
(2011 Series )
Page 1 of 3
ORDINANCE NO .
(2011 Series)
AN ORDINANCE OF THE COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF SAN LUIS OBISPO ADDIN G
CHAPTER 9 .50 OF THE SAN LUIS OBISPO MUNICIPAL CODE ADDING A
CURFEW FOR MINOR S
WHEREAS,the Council of the City of San Luis Obispo met in the Council Chamber o f
City Hall, 990 Palm Street, San Luis Obispo, California, on , for the
purpose of considering changes proposed to the Municipal Code ; and
WHEREAS,the Council finds that minors engaging in criminal conduct or activities that
are likely to result in criminal conduct create a public health and safety risk ; an d
WHEREAS,access by minors to alcohol and drugs in our community is of particula r
concern, especially on weekend nights ; an d
WHEREAS,many communities, including the other cities in San Luis County an d
surrounding counties, have nighttime curfews for minors in order to deter criminal an d
delinquent behavior by unsupervised minors late at night ; and
WHEREAS,a nighttime curfew ordinance for minors would provide parents with a too l
to reinforce their home curfew rules and provide law enforcement with the legal ability to detain
minors and return them home before they are caught engaging in criminal behavior .
NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT ORDAINED by the Council of the City of San Lui s
Obispo as follows :
SECTION 1 .New Chapter 9 .50 (Curfew) of Title 9 (Public Peace, Morals and Welfare )
of the San Luis Obispo Municipal Code is hereby adopted to read as follows :
Chapter 9 .5 0
CURFEW
Sections :
9 .50 .010 Definition s
9 .50 .020 Curfew Regulation s
9 .50 .030 Penalties for Violation s
9 .50 .010 Definition s
All defined terms in this Chapter appear in italics . For purposes of this Chapter, th e
following definitions apply :
A.Curfew Hours means the period from 11 :00 p .m . any evening of the week, until 5 :00 a .m .
the following day .
B.Emergency means an unforeseen combination of circumstances or the resulting state tha t
calls for immediate action . The term includes, but is not limited to, a fire, natural disaster, a n
automobile accident or any situation requiring immediate action to prevent serious bodily injury ,
loss of life or major damage to real property . "Serious bodily injury" means bodily injury that
Ordinance No .
(2011 Series)
ATTACHMENT 1
Page 2 of 3
creates a substantial risk of death or that causes death, serious permanent disfigurement o r
protracted loss or impairment of the function of any bodily member or organ .
C.Establishment means any privately-owned place of business to which the public i s
invited, including but not limited to any place of amusement or entertainment .
D. Guardian means (1) a person who, under court order, is the guardian of a minor ;or
(2) a public or private agency with whom a minor has been placed by the court .
E.Minor means any person under eighteen (18) years of age .
G.Parent means a person who is a natural parent, adoptive parent, or step-parent o f
another person .
H.Private Place means any place that is neither a Public Place nor Establishment .
I.Public place means any place to which the public or a substantial group of the public ha s
access and includes, but is not limited to, streets, highways, parks, and the common areas o f
schools, hospitals, local transportation facilities and shops .
J.Responsible Adult means a person at least eighteen (18) years of age, authorized by a
parent or guardian to have the care and custody of a minor, and not engaged in any unlawfu l
activity .
9 .50 .020 Curfew Regulation s
A . It is unlawful for any minor to be present in any public place or on the premises of an y
establishment within the City of San Luis Obispo during curfew hours .
B . It is unlawful for any parent or guardian of a minor knowingly to permit, or b y
insufficient control to allow, the minor to be present in any public place or on the premises o f
any establishment within the City of San Luis Obispo during curfew hours .
C . It is a defense to prosecution under section 9 .50 .020A or B that the minor was :
1. accompanied by the minor 's parent or guardian,or by a responsible adult ;
2.on an errand at the direction of the minor 's parent or guardian,or the responsible
adult,without any detour or stop ;
3.in a motor vehicle involved in interstate travel ;
4.engaged in an employment activity, or going to or returning from an employment
activity to a private place without any detour or stop ;
5.involved in an emergency ;
6. on the sidewalk abutting the minor 's residence ;
7. attending an official school, religious, or other recreational activity supervised b y
adults and sponsored by the City of San Luis Obispo, a civic organization, or anothe r
similar entity that takes responsibility for the minor,or going to or returning from a n
official school, religious, or other recreational activity supervised by adults an d
sponsored by the City of San Luis Obispo, a civic organization, or another similar entity
that takes responsibility for the minor to or from a private place without any detour o r
stop ;
8. exercising First Amendment rights protected by the United States Constitution, o r
going to or returning from the exercising of those First Amendment rights to or from a
private place without any detour or stop ;
9. travelling from an activity listed in section 9 .50 .020C to another activity listed i n
section 9 .50 .020C, without any detour or stop ;
10.emancipated pursuant to law ;
11.going to or returning from any private place,without detour or stop .
D . Before taking any enforcement action under this section, a police officer shall ask th e
apparent offender's age and reason for being in the public place or on the premises of the
Ordinance No .
(2011 Series)
ATTACHMENT 1
Page 3 of 3
establishment during curfew hours .The police officer shall not issue a citation or make an arres t
under this section unless the officer reasonably believes that an offense has occurred and that ,
based on any responses and other circumstances, no defense under section 9 .50 .020(c) is presen t
or applicable .
E . Each violation of this section shall constitute a separate offense .
9 .50.030 Penalties for Violation s
A Any minor violating section 9 .50 .020A is guilty of an infraction punishable by (1) a fin e
not to exceed one hundred dollars and/or ten hours of community service for the first violation ;
(2) a fine not to exceed two hundred dollars and/or twenty hours of community service for th e
second violation; (3) a fine not to exceed two hundred fifty dollars and/or twenty-five hours o f
community service for the third or subsequent violation of this section . Community service shal l
be served during a time other than the minor's hours of school attendance or employment .
B.Notwithstanding any other provision of this Code, when a minor is charged with a
violation of this article, and a police officer issues a notice to appear, the charge shall be deeme d
an infraction unless another disposition is elected under Welfare and Institutions Code Section s
601 or 602 or other applicable state laws .
C.Any parent or guardian violating section 9 .50 .020B is guilty of an infraction punishabl e
by (1) a fine not to exceed one hundred dollars and/or ten hours of community service for th e
first violation ; (2) a fine not to exceed two hundred fifty dollars and/or twenty-five hours o f
community service for the second violation ; (3) a fine not to exceed five hundred dollars and/o r
fifty hours of community service for the third or subsequent violation of this section .
INTRODUCED on the 19th day of April 2011 AND FINALLY ADOPTED by the Council o f
the City of San Luis Obispo on the day of 2011, on the following
vote :
AYES :
NOES :
ABSENT :
Mayor Jan Mar x
ATTEST :
Elaina Can o
City Clerk
Christine Dietric k
City Attorney
ATTACHMENT 2
NIGHTTIME CURFEW COMPARISON S
Jurisdiction Infraction o r
Misdemeanor
Days and Times Other Info
SLO County I l 1pm-5am Sun-Thur s
12am-5am Fri-Sat
Cost recovery componen t
Arroyo Grande M 1 1pm-6am Daily
Atascadero M l 1pm-5am Dail y
Grover Beach I 10pm-6am Dail y
Morro Bay I l 1pm-5am Sun-Thur s
12am-5am Fri-Sat
Cost recovery componen t
Paso Robles M l l pm-6am Sun-Thur s
12am-6am Fri-Sat, holidays ,
summer
Pismo Beach I 1 1pm-6am Dail y
Santa Barbara County I 10pm-Sunrise Daily Penalty 1) $100 or 10 hrs
comm service 2) $250 or 2 5
hrs, 3) $500 or 50 hr s
Lompoc I 10pm-6am Daily Also daytime curfe w
Santa Barbara City I 10pm-Sunrise Daily Also daytime curfe w
Santa Maria I l 1pm-6am Daily Also daytime curfe w
Monterey County M 10pm-6am Dail y
King City I 10pm-5am Dail y
Monterey City I 1 1pm-5am Dail y
Salinas I l 1pm-5am Dail y
Fresno County M 10pm-5am Dail y
Clovis M 10pm-Sunris e
Fresno City I 10pm-5am Daily Cost recovery componen t
Kern County I 10pm-5am Dail y
Bakersfield I 10pm-5am Dail y
Chico I 10pm-5am Dail y
Las Vegas I 10pm-5am Sun-Thur s
12am-5am Fri-Sat, holidays ,
summe r
Long Beach I 10pm-6am Daily Also daytime curfew
Sacramento M 10pm-6am Dail y
Santa Cruz I/M l 1pm-5am Daily
From: Blackstone, Matt
Sent: Wednesday, April 20, 2011 12:47:47 AM
To: Council, S1oCity
Cc: Beckwith, Christy; Alexander, Dustin; Schafer, Aaron; Sims,
Barbara;
Stahnke, Adam
Subject: employee input
/456YCi�y62
Auto forwarded by a Rule
e`er
Mayor and members of Council, dc : 'E:2o,25 ^-
I regret that I was not able to attend to meeting of City Council where
input from employees was discussed with regard to the two potential
ballot initiatives. I was working and based on our exclusion of
uniformed city employees attending City Council meetings, I was not
present. It is unfortunate that the meeting was scheduled during the
normal working hours of the majority of City employees, to seek
employee input, with the knowledge that many of these employees would
be excluded from attendance. Either way, I believe the end result was a
fore gone conclusion..
Since the majority of Council has decided to move forward with the
direction to place a pension reform initiative and the full repeal of
binding arbitration on a ballot, I have a suggestion for receiving
employee input.. If council is truly concerned about the input from line
level members of the city employees, a survey of the city employees
should be conducted. Council has usually embraced the use of surveys to
determine a baseline of feedback for the issues at hand. In many cases,
Council has spent large sums of money to survey the public on important
issues facing the City. A survey of the city employee group could be
done at very little cost by use of the city email system and a website
similar to those used in the past for surveys such as Survey Monkey.
This type of survey would provide some level of anonymity to the
individual employee and provide a result of the survey to council that
could be included in the final decision making process to place
initiatives on the ballot. The cost of the survey would be minimal
based on the published rates on the- Survey Monkey website.
Some of the documents I have reviewed as related to the two ballot
initiatives have referenced the impact on employee morale. I suggest
you use this topic as the as the focus of a survey. I believe that the
level of input you have received thus far, is not representative of the
true input from employees. The methods used to deliver the message to
council by using supervisory and management members of city staff as
the conduit to relay the message has had a chilling effect on
individuals providing input to council. As I am sure you recognize, the
line level worker of the city is the backbone. of the service provided
to our residents and visitors. When morale within this group suffers,
the service to the community you have been elected to represent can be
adversely impacted.
Here are a few suggestions for questions based on conversations I have
had with other city employees to gauge the impact of your decisions on
the employees.
1. How have the recent actions of City Council affected your morale
as an employee of the City.
_ U
The rating could be based on a number scale using zero as a baseline
and allow options of numbers on a positive and negative scale to rate
effect on morale.
2.. Recent decisions of Council (related to ballot initiatives) have
had what effect on my long-term plans of public service.
a. No effect
b. Plan to stay longer
C. Plan to leave sooner
3. Recent decisions of Council (related to ballot initiatives) have
had what effect on my desire to make financial concessions.
a. No effect
b. More willing to agree
C. Less willing to agree
4. The recent actions of Council have been primarily focused on
obtaining fiscal sustainability of the City.
a. Strongly agree
b. Somewhat agree
C. Undecided
d. Somewhat disagree
e. Strongly disagree
5. The recent actions of Council have been .primarily focused on
political agenda and special interests..
a. Strongly agree
b. Somewhat agree
C. Undecided
d. Somewhat disagree
e. Strongly disagree
This would obviously not be an inclusive list of questions in the
survey and the formatting of the email has altered to original document
slightly. I think the general message has been conveyed that I believe
what council has received in the way of employee feedback is not
representative of the employee group... Hopefully Council will seek
additional information from employees in a manner that encourages
candid feedback. As I relayed through discussions with management,
there is no exigency to proceed forward with either of. these issues
with regard to the fiscal issues facing the city.
Respectfully submitted,
M. Blackstone
President SLOPOA
Public Comment. Agenda Item_(19 April 2011)
Dear Mayor Marx and Council Members.
My name is Richard acre jsa. I am a resident of San Luis Obispo and i
don't envy your budgeting tasks for the next few months.
In my life during the last century, in fact 41 years ago this week, i
was the Coordinator for the first Earth Day Celebration and
Teach-In within SLO County.
40 years ago, i was the Co-founder and first Chairman of ECOSLO:
38 years ago I was elected to the Board of Supervisors representing
SLO City and 36 years ago 1 served as Chairman of that Board. i
also served this County and City for 8 years as Chairman or Vice
Chairman of several local, regional and statewide Health and Natural
Resources Committees plus 2 years on the City's EQTf.
I tell you this not to blow my own horn but to let you know that I
once held political office. I've had my share of political intrigues. i
also know that city or county staffs sometimes have intrigues, or their
own agendas and turf, which they like to control and protect,
sometimes even when it might be in conflict with the views of
Officials. constituents, and even current City/County plans.
This afternoon, I had a short but pleasant discussion with Mr. Michael
Codron, our Assistant City Administrator. I told him some of the history
about how the Natural Resource Manager position and the City Biologist
position came into being. He assured me that no one was thinking of
cutting those positions.
But then he said that since there was a vacant Recreation Management
position in the Parks Department, they were thinking of asking the
Council for direction as to whether or not there might be some future
"administrative efficiencies" to be gained by moving the Natural
Resource Manager's position into the Parks & Rec. Department as a
Program Manager under the current Head of the Parks and Rec.
When the word "administrative efficiencies" pops into a conversation, it
means to me that there's more to this subject than meets the eye.
When we put together the recommendation of the Natural Resource
Manager position some 15-16 years ago, we meant it to be an
independent position, especially not under the Parks Department. the
C
position was designated to protect the fauna and flora occurring within
City Open Spaces as the Green Belt gradually formed around our City.
Open Space and Wildlife Habitat protection were the main goals of the
2006 Conservation and Open Space dement. Providing "passive"
recreation was a secondary goal. But the Parks and Recreation
Department specializes in "Active" recreation and these types of
activities and thrill sports should not be allowed in City Open Spaces.
I see great potential for conflict between the two Program Manager
positions being considered under the Head of the Parks Department.
Especially since there is only a Parks and Recreation Committee
that advises the Parks Director but no existing "Open Space
Committee" as called for in the 2006 Conservation and O.S. Element.
I don't like staff's idea asking direction in considering "administrative
efficiencies" concerning the placement of the Natural Resource Manager
and City Biologist positions. they should remain independent or, if
anything, from a biologist's perspective, the Parks and Recreation
Department and its head should naturally be placed under the direction
of the head of a new Natural Resources Management Department!
Don't spend any more time on staff's idea. they have many other more
important jobs to accomplish for you than tinkering with administrative
efficiencies!
Thank you for your consideration in hearing my views on this matter.
Dr. Richard J. acre jsa
rkrejsa@calpoiy.edu
From: Odile Ayral [SMTP:OAYRAL@CALPOLY.EDUI
Sent: Friday, April 22, 2011 6:22 :17 PM y i 9r// CC h C-4-r7AG
To: Council, SloCity ��f'I
Subject: Budget 're;
Auto forwarded by a Rule QSSr k"MGA
�p�tnlG-9
Dear Council Members and Mayor Marx, CLL�Jl�
I have followed as best I could the debates on the city budget and I
would like to make two comments: 6` A24
1) The City Hall steps look pretty good to me. If there is water
seeping, wouldn't it be possible to simply get them repaired and
sealed? It certainly would be much cheaper (I am not even talking
about John Ashbaugh's "billionaire" proposal. ) Right now, the steps
and the building make a good pair, but once you change one, you will
sooner or later want to change the other one as well.
2) In the California University State system, an assistant professor
with a Ph.D. starts at around $50, 000 a year. I fail to understand why
a neighborhood specialist with no more than a bachelor's degree, no
special training and no danger to confront, should start at $81, 000 a
year. I now see why the city is broke and why we, the residents of
SLO, are always told there is no money when we ask for something. The
salary of a neighborhood specialist ought to start at half of what you
propose. The same goes for Ardith Tregenza's position, hugely overpaid
because it is (God only knows why) part of the police department. It
ought to be moved elsewhere, and the salary adjusted in kind. Of
course, after tightening my belt for 30 years at Cal Poly, most city
employees look overpaid to me, but shouldn't state and city employees
be paid about the same for similar jobs?
Respectfully yours,
Odile Ayral
300 Ferrini
San Luis Obispo
CA 93405
From: Larry Pennington[SMTP:LNKPEN@SBCGLOBAL.NET]
Sent: Sunday, April 24, 2011 11:25:45 AM
To: Council, SloCity
Subject: fees/budget
Auto forwarded by a Rule
Dear Mayor and Council Members,
Increased sales taxes, increased parking fees, now you propose charging for street
sweeping and increasing the rates for the water we did not use because you said...
I
J
When do you stop???
You people are tempting me to profanity.
Why don't you try just a little bit harder to get your house in order and then maybe,just
maybe we can talk.
Thank you.
Sincerely,
Larry Pennington
From:Camille Small[SMTP:NOTETOCAMILLE@YAHOO.COM] '�FTEvn 0 3
Sent: Tuesday, April 19, 2011 6:23:40 PM
To: Council, SloCity
Subject: Neighborhood Specialists , J�
Auto forwarded by a Rule —fee M®2
Ass"f 0rTy �fG�
Dear Mayor and Council, ATrbfi�vfy
It is late to submit for tonight's meeting. My apology.
I am pleased to see the recommendation in the staff report
for filling these positions..
Since there are details that obviously have to be worked out,
it would be good to vote to fund the positions tonight--and return to details
at a later date. It would be an efficient use of your time to have more of
the details worked out before you go through a lengthy process of discussing each of
them.
While residents and/or neighborhood groups are not meant to be a part
of the official process (i.e. information for a Staff report), it is possible there are some
good ideas that both Staff and Council would be interested in considering. The ideas I
have heard are not controversial; rather, they
could make the program more efficient/effective.
Respectfully,
Camille Small
RED FILE
April 19, 2011 MEETING AGENDA
To: San Luis Obispo City Council DATE t/ ITEM O�R-Cdds,4
From: Philip Ruggles, city resident and property owner
Subject: Staff proposal to move City's Natural Resource Manager to the Park and
Recreation Department then to a position under the Park and Recreation
Director
Dear Mayor Marx and Council Members:
I very strongly object to city staffs current proposal to move the City's Natural Resource
Manager to the Park and.Recreation Department and then to a position under the Park
and Recreation Director.
The reason is simple . . . the stated objectives of these two groups are in direct conflict.
In sum, the Park and Recreation function is to develop and oversee "active" activities
within the City while the Natural Resource Manager's function, and direct responsibility,
is to"preserve natural resources."
Such a personnel move, if approved by the Council, would initiate a risky, troubling and
dangerous "re-ordering"of these two groups, each clearly charged with different
obligations and responsibilities. It seems reasonable to expect such a move to lead, over
time, to an unintended "creep"where active recreation encroaches on dedicated, natural
open space where only passive recreation is allowed.
I do not think it would be the intention of Council to take this action knowing that the
ultimate result could lead to the degradation of our natural open space. Preservation of
open space is a top Measure Y priority with City voters.
The 2006 Conservation and Open Space Element permits "passive" recreation in natural
open space only when it will not degrade the natural resources being protected or create
compatibility impacts with the adjoining residential neighborhoods. For the record: I am a
homeowner living directly adjacent to the City's Natural Open Space in the Ferrini Ranch
development. My family and I have lived at our present location for many years. As with
all my neighbors, we value the quietness of the area, the abundant and varied wildlife
and the many unspoiled natural resources that we wish to keep intact.
I strongly urge the City Council to give direction to City Staff that this personnel move
would not be in the best interest of the residential neighborhoods adjoining natural open
space or our city residents who enjoy our open spaces and the natural beauty they give
all of us.
Our open spaces are a key to living in our wonderful city and must always preserve the
natural amenities we are so fortunate to have.
Thank you for your consideration in this matter. hard eDur. - mail:
0 COUNCIL o CDD DIR
Sincerely, o CRYMGR 0 FrrDIR
o ASSfCM o FMCHU
n ATTORNEY o PWDIR
CHIEF
Philip K. Ruggles o P&c o POLICE M
c TRIBUNE 0 UTILDIR
o NEWTDM o HRDIR
0 SWCITYNEWS 0 COUNCIL
0 CRY MGR
0 CLERK
RED FILE
MEETING AGENT
�lillllll����� illl'I�I' DATE l9 n ITEM # as aov,s�s�
� council mEmoRanc�um
ar4.co
DATE: April 14, 2011 a COUNCIL oCDD DIR
a CITY MGR a FMDIR
a AMCM a FDIECM
TO: City Council a ATrORM a PW DM
a CLERWORIG a POLICE CMF
a PM o PAW&RECDIR
VIA: Katie Lichti , Cit Manager a NEVIiviviIE o HRDM UMDIt
S Y g � o xEwT1MFs o ARDIR
o SLOCrYNM a COUNCEL
a CrIY MGR
FROM: John Mandeville, Community Development Director a CLISM
Deborah Linden, Police Chief
Jay Walter, Public Works Director
SUBJECT: Red File—Neighborhood Wellness Major City Goal
During the April 12, 2011, Council consideration of Major City Goals, the Council directed staff
to revise the work program for the Neighborhood Wellness Major City Goal. The Council
directed staff to create a more robust enforcement program utilizing additional resources in the
form of neighborhood services specialists. Several Council members specifically noted the
importance of having more enforcement personnel in the neighborhoods. Staff was directed to
consider adding code enforcement capabilities similar to the City of Davis, which employs
Neighborhood Service Specialists who address noise violations, neighborhood enhancement
ordinance violations, neighborhood parking problems and coordinate with police and code
enforcement personnel.
Staff has substantially revised the work program for the Neighborhood Wellness Major City
Goal to implement Council's direction (Attachment 1). The revised work program proposes
shifting responsibility for enforcement of all neighborhood code violations to the Community
Development Department, including enforcement of Neighborhood Enhancement Ordinance
violations currently being conducted by the Police Department via the Student Neighborhood
Assistance Program (SNAP). This shift will better align and centralize code enforcement under
one Department which will allow for more coordinated and streamlined reporting and
enforcement procedures. The revised work program includes creating two Neighborhood
Services Specialist positions in the Community Development Department to conduct
enforcement of code and parking violations in the neighborhoods, including those contained in
the previous version of the work program of the Major City Goal and supported by Residents for
Quality Neighborhoods (RQN). Specifically, the focus of the Neighborhood Service Specialists
would include:
1. Property maintenance and trash receptacle storage.
2. Illegal conversions of non-habitable space to living areas.
3. Fence height violations.
4. Unpermitted fraternities and sororities and "satellite houses."
5. Neighborhood parking, including front yard parking violations.
6. Other violations as defined in the neighborhood enhancement ordinance.
Enforcement of noise violations is proposed to remain with the Police Department using SNAP
personnel for warnings and police officers for citations. As noted last Tuesday night by Chief
Linden, noise violations that warrant citations can become volatile and involve other criminal
acts, and are best handled by police officers. Therefore, staff is not proposing the new
Neighborhood Services Specialists enforce the noise ordinance. In addition, noise violations
usually occur during the late night hours, especially on weekends, and the flexibility of SNAP
schedules is conducive to these duties. The scheduling of the new Neighborhood Services
Specialists has not been determined; however they will be assigned to daytime duties. Code
enforcement is more effectively conducted during daytime hours when violations are much
easier to observe and document, residents are more available for contact, and follow-up
casework can be more efficiently conducted. If this work program is approved, staff will
determine the most effective schedule to accomplish the program goals.
With respect to neighborhood parking enforcement, the new Neighborhood Services Specialists'
duties would be coordinated with the activities of the SNAP staff and augmented by adding a
half-time contract parking enforcement officer devoted to the neighborhood on weekend days.
This half-time position replaces the previously proposed full-time contract position. Because of
the greater flexibility in their schedules, SNAP personnel would continue to provide
neighborhood parking district enforcement primarily during the nighttime hours while the new
half-time parking officer and the Neighborhood Services Specialists would work primarily
during the daytime hours, enforcing parking violations as part of their field duties. Since SNAP
employees would no longer be responsible for enforcing code violations, staff will be able to
enhance SNAP parking enforcement without needing a budget augmentation. In sum the cost of
this effort is as follows:
Cost Summary
Operating Programs Capital Improvement Plan
2011-12 2012-13 2011-12 2012-13
1/2 Parking Enforcement Officer 24,200 38,000
2 Neighborhood Service Specialist 81,000 162,000
-Support Costs 51,000 5,000 20,000
Total 1 $156,200 $205,0001, $20,000 $0
Funding Sources
i dim Progrzm
2011-12 2012-13
Parking Fund 24,200 38,000
General Fund 152,000 167,000
Total $1769200 $2059000
A key component of the revised Goal is its public outreach and education campaign in advance
of beginning the new program activities. A more aggressive enforcement program is likely to
result in more people receiving citations, which may result in complaints from residents subject
to enforcement actions. Recent letters to the editor in the Tribune regarding the City's
enforcement of trash and recycling receptacles is an example of what can be expected when the
City begins to issue more citations for property maintenance and parking. An information and
-2-
education campaign is essential to provide residents an opportunity to learn about the new
program and comply with regulations prior to enforcement.
The proposed change to the work program for the Neighborhood Wellness Major City Goal
requires related changes to the Significant Operating Program Changes (SOPC) form that
implemented the previous version of the Goal. A new consolidated SOPC for the revised work
program for the Neighborhood Wellness Major City Goal is now needed and is attached
(Attachment 2). This new SOPC addresses the changes needed in the Community Development
Department and the Public Works Department. With the revised Neighborhood Wellness Major
City Goal and SOPC, the previous separate SOPC for a Parking Enforcement Officer is no
longer needed. Pages 132-109 through 132-112 of the April 12`h agenda packet can be discarded.
Because additional SNAP resources are no longer being requested, the SOPC for increased
SNAP resources is no longer needed and pages B2-90 through B2-92 can now also be discarded.
It is recommended that the revised Major City Goal and the SOPC be considered by the City
Council during the Strategic Budget Direction item next Tuesday night when the Council
provides direction on the other SOPC's that are recommended.
Should the Council have any questions before the meeting please feel free to be in touch with
staff.
Attachments:
1. Revised Work Plan for Neighborhood Wellness Major City Goal
2. Revised and consolidated Significant Operating Program Changes for Neighborhood
Wellness Major City Goal
-3-
NEIGHBORHOOD WELLNESS
OBJECTIVE
Embrace and implement pro-active code enforcement and Neighborhood Wellness Policies.
DISCUSSION
Measure Y Relationship: The major City goal for neighborhood wellness directly supports neighborhood code
enforcement, a top priorityfor the use of Measure Yfunds.
Proposed Scope of Work
This plan proposes hiring additional staff and re-distributing duties among several City departments in order to
provide increased enforcement of City codes, property maintenance standards and parking regulations within
residential neighborhoods. The key elements of the plan are as follows:
1. Increasing the monitoring of property conditions and enforcement of code violations in the City's
neighborhoods.
2. Review and revise the current code enforcement practices to streamline efforts and achieve greater
efficiencies.
3. Identifying and mapping neighborhoods in the City in order to provide a framework for location-specific
initiatives and better communication between city staff and residents. (This will be done as part of the
Land Use Element update.)
4. Reviewing and considering best practices used in other jurisdictions to further neighborhood wellness.
5. Evaluating how.all City departments are currently coordinating responses to violations, and creating a
more streamlined methodology for the pro-active reporting and enforcement of violations.
6. Further cross-training City employees to be the "eyes and ears" within neighborhoods to ensure code
violations are pro-actively addressed rather than requiring the nuisance be called in by residents or other
complainants.
7. Enhance pro-active efforts to deal with noise nuisances within residential neighborhoods.
8. Increasing enforcement of parking violations in the neighborhoods..
Review and Modification of Existing Code Enforcement and Neighborhood Wellness Policies
Section 1.24.010 of the Municipal Code requires staff to "...employ the philosophy of voluntary compliance
when seeking compliance with this code." The section continues with very specific guidance to staff regarding
enforcement: "Prior to implementation of the enforcement policies and penalties stated herein, voluntary
compliance approaches, when practical, should first be used to educate City property owners and businesses
concerning the requirements of the Code and the corrective action necessary to correct a violation of this Code."
Staff proposes to improve consistency among the variousfacets of the City's code enforcement program
descriptions and fee resolutions and bring back to the Council any amendments needed to reflect the more
proactive program that is the subject of this goal.
Consolidation of Neighborhood Code Enforcement
This work program proposes shifting responsibility for enforcement of all neighborhood code violations to the
Community Development Department, including enforcement of Neighborhood Enhancement Ordinance
violations currently being conducted by Police Department SNAP employees. Two new Neighborhood Services
Specialist positions will be added to the Community Development Department to augment enforcement of code
and parking violations in the neighborhoods, including:
1. Illegal conversions of non-habitable space to living areas.
2. Fence height violations.
NEIGHBORHOOD WELLNESS
3. Unpermitted fraternities and sororities and"satellite houses."
4. Improper trash can placement,
5. Debris or furniture in front yards, on roofs, or in public areas.
6. Overgrown shrubs or yards.
7. Neighborhood parking, including front yard parking violations..
8. Other violations as defined in the neighborhood enhancement ordinance.
The new Neighborhood Services Specialists will be assigned to daytime duties, which will allow for more
efficient identification of the types of violations they will be patrolling for. The employees will respond to
complaints and reports of code violations, and will address violations pro-actively based on their own
observations. The Police Department will continue to be responsible for the enforcement of noise violations in the
neighborhoods utilizing SNAP personnel for warnings and Police Officers for citations.
Increased Neighborhood Parking Enforcement
The new Neighborhood Services Specialists will patrol for violations in permit parking districts as well as
illegally parked vehicles on private property. These patrols will increase the identification of unpermitted parking
spaces in front yard areas. An additional half-time Parking Enforcement Officer will augment the existing level
of parking enforcement conducted- by Public Works/Parking Officers on weekends. SNAP employees will
continue to enforce parking violations in residential parking districts primarily during nighttime hours.
Public Outreach
A key component of the revised Goal is a public outreach and education campaign in advance of beginning the
new program activities. A more aggressive enforcement program is likely to result in more people receiving
citations, which is likely to result in complaints. Recent letters to the editor in the Tribune regarding the City's
enforcement of trash and recycling receptacles is an example of what can be expected when the City begins to
issue more citations for property maintenance and parking. An information and education campaign is essential
to provide residents an opportunity to learn about the new program and comply with regulations prior to
enforcement.
Existing Situation
Overall coordination of the City's efforts related to neighborhood wellness is accomplished by the Neighborhood
Services Team, comprised of City staff from Police, Public Works, Fire and Community Development and led by
the Neighborhood Services Manager in the Police Department. Enforcement of the various codes related to
neighborhood violations is conducted by several City departments.
• The Current Planning Division of the Community Development Department establishes policies and
procedures for determining residential parking standards and maintains a database of approved parking
areas in front yards.
• The Police Department Office of Neighborhood Services, through the Student neighborhood Assistance
Program (SNAP) addresses low-level code enforcement violations visible from the public right of way,
such as trash can placement, debris in yards, overgrown shrubbery and weeds (implementing this goal will
reassign these code enforcement duties to Community Development). SNAP employees are also responsible
for enforcing residential parking standards and noise ordinance violations.
• The Fire Prevention Bureau within the Fire Department handles fire hazards such as tall weeds and
conducts life safety inspections for businesses and residential apartments as required by state law.
• The Code Enforcement Office, within the Building & Safety Division of the Community Development
Department, investigates violations of many different building and zoning regulations, including serious
violations involving potentially hazardous conditions.
OEM I M M
NEIGHBORHOOD WELLNESS
• The Long-Range Planning Division of the Community Development Department prepares land use and area
plans within the City.
• The Utilities Department provides services to ensure accumulated waste does not create nuisances in
neighborhoods and the community's wastewater system does not suffer negative impacts from illicit
discharges.
• Currently, Parking Enforcement Officers respond to complaints and conduct pro-active enforcement of
parking violations in neighborhoods usually in the morning hours prior to addressing parking problems in
other areas of the City. Existing parking officers work Monday through Saturday from 9:00 AM to 6:00
PM. High enforcement demand in retail areas of the City limit the amount of time parking officers.are
available to patrol the neighborhoods, where violations are less frequent. Police Department SNAP
employees conduct enforcement of residential parking district violations .during dedicated parking
enforcement shifts and on a continual basis as they are conducting their other duties.
• The Public Works Department enforces illegal encroachments within the City's right of way areas,
coordinates citizen requests for traffic management and neighborhood parking districts within
neighborhoods, including parking violations in neighborhoods, oversees flood protection regulations, and
maintains infrastructure related to neighborhood wellness, such as street lighting, roadways, directional
signage and trees.
• The Finance& Information Technology(FIT)Department administers the City's Business tax and licensing
program, including residential rental properties,and processes invoices for administrative fines for code and
noise violations.
• The Geographic Information Systems division in the FIT Department produces maps based on geographic
attributes.
• The City Attorney's Office provides legal support for enforcement related activities, and initiates judicial
action if necessary to achieve compliance.
Project Work Completed
In 2007-2009, Neighborhood Wellness was addressed through implementation of the Major City Goal titled
"Increased Building & Zoning Code Enforcement and Community Appearance At that time staffing increases
were approved for the Student Neighborhood Assistance Program (SNAP) and the Code Enforcement Office.
The action plan for that goal included development of a Neighborhood Wellness Work Plan which was created
through collaboration among several city departments and community stakeholders. Since the implementation of
this plan, the number of code violations that are indentifred by city staff increased significantly, creating a more
pro-active program. Code Enforcement staff still utilizes this work plan to direct their priorities. The work plan
has elements that are relevant to this new Major City Goal and could provide a good foundation to build upon,
including:
1. Increasing outreach in order to increase reporting of code violations.
2. Cross training City employees to recognize and report serious code violations.
3. Quickly addressing complaints that jeopardize safety or create neighborhood blight.
4. Examining enforcement policies to ensure they are effective as a deterrent to violations and are used as a
corrective mechanism.
5. Identifying high priority violations that affect our neighborhoods.
Other neighborhood issues, such as noise complaints, have been addressed through increased education and
enforcement and will continue to be a significant focus of neighborhood efforts.
NEIGHBORHOOD WELLNESS
WORK PROGRAM CONSTRAINTS AND LIMITATIONS
Expanded outreach and stakeholder involvement will be necessary to fully implement the proposed action plan,
including revision of policies and implementation of new practices. Code enforcement issues often deal with
inspecting private property areas and proposed changes,to the program will need to be reviewed by the City
Attorney's Office prior to implementation to ensure they comply with legal constraints.
Increasing code and parking enforcement in the neighborhoods is likely to generate complaints from
neighborhood residents who have not been subject to regular enforcement of these types of violations. Some
residents may feel the enforcement is inappropriate and intrusive. Recently, staff has received complaints
regarding the new trash can regulations for this reason.
The revenue generated by the additional parking officer is not likely to off-set the cost of the new position and
associated equipment. Generally, parking violations in neighborhoods are less frequent and sporadic than in retail
areas and once citations are issued, compliance by residents tends to be relatively high. In addition, parking
violations and associated revenue has declined in recent years due to increases fine amounts driven by State
surcharges on parking citations.
Increased enforcement of code violations will likely increase the workload of the City Attorney's office in
prosecuting violations that are not corrected after initial enforcement action. Staff will examine the processes
involved to determine if any streamlining is possible. Reduction in resources of the City Attorney's could result
in delayed prosecution of violations.
Human Resource Review
Because these are newly proposed positions, staff has not had time to fully develop the required documentation
such as job descriptions and organizational flow charts. The assumptions at this time are that the two new
Neighborhood Services Specialist positions will be placed in a compensation bracket between a Parking
Enforcement Officer and a Code Enforcement Officer position. Final analysis of the position classification must
be done by the Human Resources department to verify compensation is commensurate with the duties and
responsibilities of the position and it is classified equitably compared to other positions within the organization.
Subsequent review of the organizational structure within the Community Development Department may also be
necessary due to the increased workloads and potential implications of expanding the code enforcement program.
This could lead to a re-organization and potential reclassification of other positions within the department which
may have cost implications for the program.
Strategies For Successfully Overcoming The Challenges
Coordination With Neighborhood Groups,Student Groups And Other City Residents
Increased efforts to meet with existing neighborhood groups, student organizations, homeowner associations and
property owner organizations are anticipated in order to solicit feedback regarding the program objectives.
Information gathered could help steer the public outreach efforts which will be an important component of the
program. Staff from the Community Development Department and the Office of Neighborhood Services will
collaborate in this effort.
Public Outreach
It is highly recommended that a well devised public outreach effort be done prior to asserting more aggressive
enforcement tactics within the neighborhoods. In order for the program to be successful it will be important for
residents to know and understand the various regulations that will be enforced: Use of a professional advertising
firm to assist with the development of the public messaging will be needed to augment the advertising expertise of
existing City staff. Once the information is created.staff could use several methods to deliver it. Development of
0 - MINT97,11
NEIGHBORHOOD WELLNESS
a Public Service Announcement to be utilized on Channel 20 or the radio;including information within utility
bills, newspapers such as the New Times or Mustang Daily; or other local publications can be done. Additional
efforts to meet directly with the residents of the neighborhoods should also be done in case the other methods do
not prove to be effective with residents not typically exposed to these mediums. Launching the program with a
"soft start"could also be considered which would mean that staff would distribute information only when a
violation is encountered until a well advertised start date,then.notice of violations or citations would begin.
STAKEHOLDERS
Stakeholders include City residents, student groups, property owners and property managers.
ACTION PLAN
Task Date
I. Begin Community Outreach Efforts July 2011
2. Review City policy regarding voluntary compliance. Sept 2011
3. Create new job classification of Neighborhood Services Specialist Nov 2011
4. Hire additional staff Feb.2012
5. Train new staff Mar-May 2012
6. Develop Public Outreach Program May-July 2012
7. Public Outreach Campaign Aug-Oct. 2012
8. Begin"soft start"of program Oct 2012
9. Begin full enforcement efforts Nov 2012
10. Monitor Progress and solicit feedback from external stakeholders On-going
11. Database enhancements and information sharing improvements On-going
KEY WORK PROGRAM ASSUMPTIONS
1. Council support for reducing the number of warnings provided before citations are issued. Currently the City
provides multiple warnings before issuing citations. This process increases the amount of staff time spent on
individual violations and limits the time that would otherwise be spent identifying new violations. The
number of violations processed is expected to increase substantially with the program changes proposed. In
order to increase the proportion of time the new enforcement staff spend in the field identifying new
violations, as opposed to time spent on repeat warnings, the new program strategy is to follow-up the initial
warning with a citation if corrective action isnot taken.
2. On-going Council support for increased enforcement efforts as the program goes through its start-up period
especially when complaints that the program is too aggressive surface. This assumption is based on the
feedback received from recent enforcement of trash and recycling receptacles.
RESPONSIBLE DEPARTMENT
♦OUR •
NEIGHBORHOOD WELLNESS
The Chief Building Official, within the Community Development Department, will act as the lead position for
this goal. Neighborhood blight and zoning code conformance will be the responsibility of the Community
Development Department. The Police and Public Works Departments will continue to focus on noise nuisances
and parking violations, however sufficient cross-training will be done in order to recognize other neighborhood
wellness issues can be identified by these personnel and be referred to Community Development Department for
follow-up action.
FINANCIAL AND STAFF RESOURCES REQUIRED TO ACHIEVE THE GOAL
Cost Summary
Operating Programs Capital Improvement Plan
2011-12 2012-13 2011-12 2012-13
1/2 time Parking Enforcement Officer 24,200 38,000
2 Neighborhood Services Specialists 81,000 162,000
1 NSS Vehicle one time 20,000
2 Computers and workstation modifications 10,000
2 Motorola MC65 (E-Ticket Package) (Optional) 15,000
Public Outreach Funding 10,000
2 Ruggedized laptop computers 11,000
Operating Budget 5,000 5,000
Total $156,200 $205,000 $20,000 $0
Funding Sources
Operating Pr atm
2011-12 2012-13
Parking Fund 24,200 38,000
General Fund 152_,000 167,000
Total $1769200 $2 000
GENERAL FUND REVENUE POTENTIAL
It is unlikely there will be a significant General Fund revenue enhancement as a result of achieving this goal.
Because the plan recommends significant public outreach and a "soft start" which will delay revenue potential
during much of the first year and three months of strict enforcement prior to the second year may lead to greater
compliance throughout neighborhoods which is the key objective, staff cannot predict the potential for revenues.
OUTCOME—FINAL WORK PRODUCT
The outcome of implementing this operating program change will be an increase in the number of code violations
identified and corrected. The result of this will be improved compliance with City regulations and an improved
appearance in the City's neighborhoods.
�Cbmmunity Development
NEIGHBORHOOD WELLNESS MAJOR CITY GOAL
Measure Y Relationship: The major City goal for neighborhood wellness directly supports neighborhood code
enforcement, a top priorityfor the use of Measure Yfunds.
Request Summary
Creating two full-time regular positions known as Neighborhood Services Specialists and adding one half-time
contract Parking Enforcement Officer to support the Neighborhood Wellness Major City Goal will cost $176,200
in 2011-12 and$205,000 in 2012-13.
Key Objectives
1. Hire additional staff in order to provide enhanced code enforcement through the use of pro-active patrols
within residential neighborhoods.
2. Review and revise the current code enforcement practices to streamline efforts and achieve greater
efficiencies.
3. Shift neighborhood enhancement ordinance duties from the Police Department to the Community
Development Department.
4. Enhance parking enforcement efforts within residential neighborhoods.
5. Enhance pro-active efforts to deal with noise nuisances within residential neighborhoods.
6. Initiate the new practices with a public information campaign.
Existing Situation: Factors Driving the Need for Change
During the budget goal setting workshops, members of the public and Residents for Quality Neighborhoods
(RQN)recommended that the City strengthen its existing code enforcementand neighborhood services programs.
The Council adopted a Neighborhood Wellness Major City Goal to "Embrace and implement pro-active code
enforcement and Neighborhood Wellness Policies."During the April 12, 2011 City Council meeting, the Council
provided further direction to staff to create work program_ that would more aggressively enforce the City
standards for:
1. Property maintenance and trash receptacle storage.
2. Illegal conversions of non-habitable space to living areas.
3. Fence height violations.
4. Unpermitted fraternities and sororities and`-`satellite houses."
5. Neighborhood parking, including front yard parking violations.
6. Other violations of the neighborhood enhancement ordinance.
The City currently has two Code Enforcement Officers responsible for enforcing the zoning and building codes.
Code enforcement has started to incorporate pro-active strategies, but remains primarily a complaint-driven
activity. Currently, property maintenance standards are primarily enforced by part-time Student Neighborhood
Assistance Program (SNAP) personnel. Strengthening enforcement efforts as proposed in the Major City Goal
includes patrolling for violations rather than responding to complaints. Patrols would look for violations of
property maintenance standards, residential parking and certain code enforcement problems. Two new
Neighborhood Services Specialists in the Cominuhity Development Department would conduct these activities.
The primary responsibility for zoning code, building code, and property maintenance standards would be
transferred to the Community Development Department.
Community Development
NEIGHBORHOOD WELLNESS MAJOR CITY GOAL
In order to achieve the objectives of this Major City Goal, staff recommends hiring two Neighborhood Services
Specialists who would share the responsibility of patrolling neighborhoods to enhance neighborhood wellness.
In addition, a half-time contract Parking Enforcement Officer would be added to the Public Works Department to
enforce neighborhood parking violations and observe/report code violations. A two-year contract position would
allow staff to evaluate whether or not the position generates sufficient parking fine revenues to offset the costs of
the parking officer. At the conclusion of the two-year term, staff will evaluate the effectiveness of the new
position before deciding to make it a permanent position.
Goal and Policy Links
1. 2011-13 Major City Goal: Neighborhood Wellness
2. Measure Y Priority
3. General Plan 2.15—Neighborhood Wellness
Service Categorization Criteria
3 = High Mid-Range(Revenue Management)
Program Work Completed
Several meetings and communications between the affected departments have already occurred. The proposed
staffing additions and program changes will dovetail into existing code enforcement programs.
Environmental Review
No environmental review is required.
Program Constraints and Limitations
1. Increasing enforcement in the neighborhoods is likely to generate complaints from neighborhood
residents who have not been subject to regular enforcement of these types of violations before. Some
residents may feel the enforcement is inappropriate and intrusive.
2. The revenue generated by the additional parking officer is not likely to off-set the cost of the new
position and associated equipment. Generally, parking violations in neighborhoods are less frequent and
sporadic than in retail areas and, once citations are issued, compliance by residents tends to be relatively
high. In addition, parking violations and associated revenue has declined in recent years due to increased
fine amounts driven by State surcharges on parking citations.
3. There is no funding in the current.budget to purchase vehicles for the added Neighborhood Services
Specialist positions to use for the additional neighborhood enforcement. Fleet Maintenance will reassign
an under-utilized fleet vehicle for one of the positions. Staff is proposing the addition of a second vehicle
for this purpose.
Stakeholders
NEIGHBORHOOD WELLNESS MAJOR CITY GOAL
Stakeholders include City residents, neighborhood associations, student groups, property owners, property
managers, and realtors.
Implementation
The additional two Neighborhood Services Specialist positions, which will be assigned to the Community
Development Building& Safety Division,will be responsible for enforcement of the neighborhood enhancement
ordinance violations and parking violations in neighborhoods. Their parking enforcement will complement the
parking enforcement done by the Parking Enforcement Officers. These two divisions will coordinate their
enforcement efforts. The duties of the Neighborhood Services Specialists will include proactively patrolling
residential neighborhoods and processing of necessary reports such as:
• Investigation reports
• Notices of violation
• Notices to correct
• Administrative citations
• Tickets for parking violations
The addition of a half-time contract Parking Enforcement Officer will take effect at the implementation of the
2011-13 Financial Plan, effective July 1, 2011. Actual hiring for employment is expected to take effect during
February,2011 for the positions.
task Date
1. Approve the budget and added positions July 2011
2. Establish job descriptions,begin recruit process November 2011
3. Interview and Hire February 2012
4. Training Feb—May 2012
Key Program Assumptions
1. Council support for reducing the number of warnings provided before citations are issued. Currently the City
provides multiple warnings before issuing citations. This process increases the amount of staff time spent on
individual violations and limits the time that would otherwise be spent identifying new violations. The
number of violations processed is expected to increase substantially with the program changes proposed. In
order to increase the proportion of time the new enforcement staff spend in the field identifying new
violations, as opposed to time spent on repeat warnings, the new program strategy is to follow-up the initial
warning with a citation if corrective action is not taken.
2. On-going Council support for increased enforcement as the program goes through its start-up period and
complaints that the program is too aggressive surface, based on the feedback received from recent
enforcement of trash and recycling receptacles.
3. Although there will be three new positions added there will be need for only one additional vehicle. Due to
the unique hours that the % time parking enforcement officer will be working, the Parking Services Division
has adequate vehicles for weekend patrols. Regarding the patrol vehicles for the neighborhood Services
Specialists, Fleet maintenance recommends reassigning an under-utilized vehicle for one of the positions and
purchase of a new vehicle for the other.
NEIGHBORHOOD WELLNESS MAJOR CITY GOAL
4. The proposed salaries of the new Neighborhood Services Specialists is assumed to be between the salary
level of the Parking Enforcement Officer and Code Enforcement Officer I positions. Human Resources will
need to analyze position duties and make a final determination of appropriate compensation.
Program Manager and Team Support
Program Manager. Chief Building Official
Project Team. Community Development Building and Safety Division
Public Works Parking Services Division
Public Works Administration Division
Police Department Office of Neighborhood Services
Alternatives
1. Continue the Status Quo. This is not recommended because continuing neighborhood nuisances has
prompted Council to adopt a Neighborhood Wellness goal.
2. Defer or Re-Phase the Request. This staffing request could be delayed or deferred until the second year
of the Financial Plan in 2012-13 which would reduce estimated costs by$89,200.
3. Change the Scope of the Request. Hire one Neighborhood Services Specialist to augment patrolling for
NEO and parking violations. This position could be assigned to the Community Development
Department, however not all the NEO duties of the SNAP employees could be transferred due to the
volume of violations that are currently enforced. A half-time contract benefited position could be
allocated to the Parking Services division for increased parking enforcement of these residential
neighborhoods. However, with part-time staff, only a portion of the key objectives for this goal could be
accomplished.
Operating Program
Building& Safety(40700)
Parking Services(50600)
Cost Summary
The anticipated salary and benefit costs for adding two Neighborhood Services Specialists (NSS) will cost
approximately $81,000 in 2011-12 and $162,000 in 2012-13. One time start up costs for the NSS positions for
computers, a vehicle and workstation modifications will cost an estimated $71,000 in 2011-12. This includes
$15,000 for two hand-held ticket writing devices that may not be required depending on the volume of parking
citations that may be issued. The proposed budget also includes $5,000 per year for on-going operating expenses.
Adding a part-time Parking Enforcement Officer position as well as the total parking citation processing costs of
the three new positions, will cost the Parking Enterprise Fund approximately$24,200 in 2011-12 (estimated for a
hire date of February 1, 2011)and$38,000 in 2012-13.
This brings the combined total cost to$176,200 in 2011-12 and$205,000 in 2012-13.
NEIGHBORHOOD WELLNESS MAJOR CITY GOAL
Parking Fund
Line Item Description Account No. 2011-12 2012-13
Staffing, 89200 16 00
Temporary Staffing(Parking Enf Officer) 510-50600-7014 8,150 16,300
Contract Services 7,200 9,800
Contract Services-citation processin 510.50600-7227 7,200 9,800
Other Operating Expenditures 8 800 11,900
Uniform 510-50600-7259 300 400
Printing 510-50600-7283 8;500 11,500
Total Operating Costs 24,2001 38,000
General Fund
Line Item Description Account No. 2011-12 2012-13
Staffing 81,000 1621000
2 Neighborhood Service Specialists 100-40700-7010 81,000 162,000
Vehicle 20,000 0
1 NSS vehicle one time 20,000
Other Operating Expenditures _ 51,000 5,000
Computer supplies 100-40700-7413 5,000
Workstation modification 100-40700-7275 5,000
2 Mobile Data Computers 100-40700-7275 11,000
Motoral MC65 (E-Ticket Packa e O tional 100-40700-7275 15,000
Public Outreach 100-40700-7843 10,000
Education and Trainin 100-40700-7459 2,5001 2,500
Office Supplies 100-40700-77421 2,5001 2,500
Total Operating Costs 1 152,0001 167,000
RED FILE
council m Em oizan ouMEETING AGENDA
f
TE y �4�ii ITEM #�
April 15, 2011 hard cow. emaih
a COMM a CDD DIR
a CRY MGR a FRDIR
TO: City Council o o PFD
IR
a CItRWRIG a POLICE CHIEF
FROM: Katie Lichtig, City Manager a THWNE o PUTELDIRRECD >R
a NEWnhQS a HRDIR
o SIA CRY NEWS a CGu aL
Prepared by: Michael Codron, Assistant City Manager a CRY MGR
Brigitte Elke, Principal Administrative Analyst a CLERK
SUBJECT: Promotional Coordinating Committee Recommendation to increase the
Community Promotions budget for 2011-13.
Background
The Promotional Coordinating Committee (PCC) makes recommendations to the City Council for
the use of Community Promotions funding. They also review the cultural grants-in-aid program
under Cultural Activities and make recommendations regarding the use of the grant funding. Both
programs are designed to enhance the cultural, recreational, and social live of the City's residents, as
well as to attract day visitors and tourist to San Luis Obispo.
Specifically,the mission statement for the PCC is as follows:
The Goals of the City of San Luis Obispo Promotional Coordinating Committee are to (1)
Improve the quality of life available to all residents of and visitors to San Luis Obispo and (2)
Promote, in a manner consistent with long-range community goals, the development of San
Luis Obispo as a regional and tourist center.
Over the years, the PCC has administered contracts with advertising agencies for tourism promotion,
the Chamber of Commerce for Public Relations, events promotion, and Visitors Center services, and
the County Visitors and Conference Bureau for regional marketing efforts. However, with the
establishment of the Tourism Business Improvement District, the PCC's purview and programs
turned more internal to beautification (mainly in form of signage), events promotion, and shopping
and dining in San Luis Obispo.
Current Situation and Financial Plan Outlook
In 2010-11the PCC administered a budget of $372,000 under Community Promotion and $90,000
under Cultural Activities for Grants-in-Aid (total = $462,000). Programs under Community
Promotions varied from the directional signage project, open space kiosks, events promotion,
ShopSLOIDineSLO, and in-county PR,to the support of the Chamber of Commerce Visitors Center.
In preparation of the 2011-13 financial plan and based on the budget challenges the City is facing,
staff proposed to incorporate the Grants-in-Aid funding and program into Community Promotions
and reduce the overall budget by $115,000. This left the committee with approximately $350,000 for
all its activities and the opportunity to structure the program from ground up to best fit the defined
mission statement as noted above.
i
Council Memorandum—PCC Budr,,L Recommendation Page 2
During the regular monthly meeting of the PCC in March, the Assistant City Manager presented the
proposed budget to the committee members and a budget task force was selected to determine a
preliminary proposal for the use of the funding.
Task Force Recommendation and Committee Deliberation
This task force met twice in the weeks prior to the April PCC meeting and presented a preliminary
budget to the full committee on April 13, 2011. In their deliberation, the task force members went
over the current contractual obligations and evaluated the programs as to their benefit to the City and
its promotional goals. They separated the programs they found essential to the program from the ones
that needed to be redefined. The general sense of the task force was that several of the current
program components lacked a comprehensive and inclusive approach. They were therefore hard to
track as to beneficial outcome and monetary impact. They concluded that they needed to start with a
comprehensive marketing plan, followed by incentive/call-to-action based programs to determine
whether the programs entice people to come to San Luis Obispo for events, shopping, and dining.
There was not sufficient time to determine the exact details of the new program, so the task force
worked with a budget they deemed needed to fully realize the preliminary scope.
Preliminary Funding Recommendation presented by the Task Force
Events promotion and grants-in-aid needed to remain a cornerstone of the program $152,500
Having come far in the directional sign program, it was important to continue the $25,000
build out of the project
New Marketing Plan and incentive program incl. a PR component $132,500
The Visitors Center had previously received $76,500 in contribution, but the $40,000
subcommittee supported a reduction
Total Budget $350,000
During the April PCC meeting, the PCC discussed the recommendation and the new direction the
task force had defined. In addition, the committee circled back to the pervious budget, budget cuts,
and impacts on the program. After lengthy deliberation and input from the public, the committee
motioned to ask the City Council for increased funding. The members felt that the program was cut
too much in order to continue an effective program and continue with some of the efforts started in
the 2009-11 financial plan period. The following motion was entertained, seconded, and passed
(motion carried 6:0):
ACTION: Moved by Billinz/Davis to recommend to the City Council to add to the Community
Promotions budget an additional $25,000 for directional sign program and $36,500 for
full funding of Chamber of Commerce Visitors Center.
This action would bring the available amount for project construction of signage to $100,000 and
allow for the build out most of the vehicular and pedestrian related signage. City Engineering
estimates $150,000 needed for full build-out of Phase One which is pedestrian and vehicular signs.
The committee asked its TBID liaison to request that the TBID add some funding to this effort as
well.
Council Memorandum—PCC Budr,.;cRecommendation Page 3
Staff Evaluation
Staff subsequently reviewed the PCC's preliminary budget recommendation and request for
increased funding. Based on the information provided, staff agrees that the request for one-time
funding for the directional signage program is warranted due to the clear need for such a project and
the opportunity to use one-time funds to leverage funds already invested. However, in comparison to
the longstanding funding for the Chamber of Commerce Visitors Center, the proposed allocation of
$132,500 to the new marketing-plan and incentive program is not sufficiently defined to justify an
additional funding allocation. As a result, staff believes it is more prudent that the PCC prioritize all
its ongoing expenditures within the previously proposed budget allocation, rather than requesting
additional funding.
Staff Recommendation
1) Allow one-time funding of $25,000 in 2011-12 for the build-out of the directional signage
program for vehicular and pedestrian related signs.
2) Deny the request for the additional funding to enhance the cultural, recreational, and social
live of the City's residents, as well as to attract day visitors and tourist to San Luis Obispo . If
the committee believes the Visitor Center operated by the Chamber of Commerce is a priority
consistent with the PCC's primary mission then funding should be taken from the allocated
$350,000 and other programs re-prioritized and revised accordingly.
GAProjects&Programs\P.C.C\Budget\2011-13\Memo to Council-Budget Request.doc
RED FILE
MEETING AGENDA
DATE 11hi ITEM # (ZAWS'�
From: Lichtig, Katie
Sent: Monday, April 18, 20116:23 PM hard CO - emwi'
CDD
To: Department Heads a CrrYYMGCOUNH a RTDM
Cc: Cano, Elaina a AWCM a FMCHIEF
SuSubject: Critical Path issues re: strategic budget direction a 'L0� a PwD>R
bl e9 g o cLERsrouc o PoucECH>EF
a FIB a PARR &MDI&
C1 TRUPM a UrILDIR
BCC: CC a NEWTDW aHRDIR
a SLOCIIYNEM a COUNCIL
a C[rYMGR
Mayor and Council: a CLEM
As Council is aware, at the April 19, 2011 meeting, you will conclude this stage of the
budget process by providing strategic budget direction. On April 11,2011 the Council
received a memorandum outlining the specific policy direction staff is seeking. In order
to produce a Preliminary Budget by May 20`h(based on the feedback last week we are
working to get the budget documents out almost a week earlier than the approved
schedule)that reflects the Council's priorities, staff needs policy direction on items on a
"critical path" for budget formulation at tomorrow night's meeting. The Mayor thought it
would be helpful to clarify which items from the April I Ith memo are not on this critical
path. These items are reflected below in strike-through. Mary's intent is to present the
critical path issues first for Council consideration and in the order listed below. If time
permits we'll be pleased to get policy direction.
Policy questions from April 11, 2011 memorandum:
.1. -Dees the Getmeil agFee with the Key Sustainability Pr-ineiples tha4 we used te
2. Capital Improvement Plan
■ Does a majority of the Council concur with the level of investment proposed
for the five-year Capital Improvement Plan and the phased approach?
aDoes it appropriate!),Fefleet NilajeF City Geals a-ad Measufe Y priorities?
•
Are there any projects that should be included or excluded?
■ If a majority of Council wishes to change the level of investment in the CIP,
please tell us if you want to impact enhanced revenues, operating budget
reductions, or personnel cost reductions.
3. Revenue Enhancements
■ Are there any of the proposed revenue enhancements that a majority of
Council does not want to pursue at this time?
■ If so, please tell us whether you want to increase operating budget
reductions or personnel cost reductions/employee concessions in place of
the revenue proposed.
4. Significant Operating Program Changes
Are there any of the Significant Operating Program Changes which add costs
to the General Fund that a Council majority do not want to include in the
2011-13 Financial Plan?
5. Operating Budget Reductions
• Are there any operating budget reductions recommended that a majority of
Council believes should not be included in our budget balancing strategy?
■ If Council does not wish to include one of the recommended options, you may
direct staff to select another budget reduction which is not currently
recommended or increase the amount attributed to personnel cost reductions.
The complete list of operating budget reduction options developed by staff is
included in the report as Attachment 5.
6. Personnel Cost Reductions/Employee Concessions
■ Is the level of personnel cost reductions(employee concessions/contributions
to reduce ongoing personnel costs)proposed acceptable?
7. Does the Council support the use of the$1.6 million in excess reserves estimated
to be available at the end of 2010-11 for the one-time purposes identified?
8. Should the Golf Fund be transitioned from an Enterprise Fund to a Special
Revenue Fund?
9. Should we consider organizational efficiencies and cost savings related to the
Natural Resources and Parks and Recreation programs?
Please don't hesitate to be in touch with questions.
Katie E. Lichtig
City Manager
City of San Luis Obispo, CA
990 Palm Street
San Luis Obispo, CA 93401-3249
805-781-7114
www.slocity.org
har'�opy: snail:
p ( JL a WD DIR
p C►._40 a FITDIR
0 ASSMA a FHIECHIEF
a MORNEY 0 FW Dnk
a CLUWRIG 0 POLICECHIEF
From: Carolyn[SMTP:KE6HNG@ATT.NET] a TRIMa UMDI RECD>R
Ns
Sent: Monday, April 18, 2011 9:42:28 AM 0 NEWTUM 0 HRDIR
Crry Nm To: Council, SloCity ° �0 o�MaLcR
Subject: Laguna Lake Golf Course a
Auto forwarded by a Rule
Dear Mayor Marx and Council Members Ashbaugh, Carpenter, Carter, and Smith,
After reviewing Page 14 (62-14) of the Strategic Budget Direction, regarding the
Laguna Lake Municipal Golf Course, I felt the need to comment on Staffs
recommendation for the creation of a new"Special Revenue Fund." It makes no
sense to me that it is still being recommended that the golf course be treated
differently than the other recreational sporting facilities--the swimming pool and
the soccer fields. They all three generate income and they all three rely on
General Fund subsidy. It appears that the recommended special fund is just
another name for nearly the same thing as an Enterprise Fund.
The report indicates that a Special Revenue Fund will allow for an extra level of
"accountability and transparency as to how revenues and expenditures are being
allocated."This was also one of the reasons previously given for keeping LLGC in
the Enterprise Fund. The only difference that I can tell is that the course won't
be obligated to pay for itself but the rest appears to be the same. If the golf
course requires a higher level of accountability and transparency, why shouldn't
we expect that same level of scrutiny of the swimming pool and the soccer
fields? If this is the major reason for creating a special fund for LLGC, then
perhaps all three facilities would be better operated in a Special Revenue Fund.
Further, I do not believe that maintaining LLGC in a Special Revenue Fund will
make the Parks and Recreation Department work any harder in trying to reduce
costs or increase revenues. They have historically always been very effective in
those endeavors and have never given anyone any reason to believe that they
wouldn't continue to do so if the course was moved into the General Fund. I
assume those expectations have always existed regarding the swimming pool
and the soccer fields as well, so one would expect the same regarding the golf
course.
You recently received a Petition signed by over 200 San Luis Obispo residents
requesting that LLGC be treated the same as the other sporting facilities by
moving it into the General Fund. As one of the citizens who participated in
obtaining some of those signatures, I can assure you that I could have gotten.
many more signatures in support. Nearly every resident I spoke to was very
supportive of LLGC and the move of its funding to the General Fund and could
not understand why the golf course was being treated differently than the
swimming pool. Further, many were very disturbed that the golf course is
RED FILE
MEETING AGENDA
DATE f / ITEM #P3(RAJ
l '
always under the threat of sale, turning the property into some type of high
density housing.
Therefore, I urge you to listen to your constituents in their request for fair and
equal treatment of the recreational sporting facilities in our City by moving LLGC
into the General Fund.
Thank you for your consideration.
Carolyn Smith
San Luis Obispo, CA
From: ARTS Obispo Director(Marta Peluso)[SMTP:DIRECTOR a(ARTSOBISPO.ORG]
Sent: Monday, April 18, 2011 1:50:37 PM
To: Council, SloCity
Subject: Integrity of the Public Art Program
Auto forwarded by a Rule
Dear Mayor and City Council Members,
Please read the attached letter of importance from Ann Ream and me regarding the City of
SLO's Public Art Funds.
Sincerely, Marta Peluso
Marta Peluso, Executive Director
ARTS Obispo
(805) 544-9251
www.artsobispo.org
April 18, 2011
Katie Lichtig,
It is our understanding that you are considering transferring the
Public Art Fund into the City's General Fund. When the visual Arts in
Public Places program was initiated by the City of San Luis Obispo, the
Assistant Administrator and the SLO County Arts Council's Art in Public
Places Committee wrote the comprehensive guidelines which are still in
effect (These guidelines have been a model for other cities) . At the
time, there was a fear expressed that in times of hardship the City
would use public art money as part of the General Fund. It was .
therefore agreed by the City to create a Public Art Fund that was to be
used exclusively for public art.
These funds have been used for many wonderful public art pieces in the
community. Because of the segregated account many things have become
possible, not the least of which is the Matching Funds Program. "Bee
Bee works His Magic" (at the Little Theater) was a combination of funds
from the Public Art Fund and funds contributed by family and friends of
I
♦ J/i
William Beeson. Currently, the Community Garden Project is underway
(with 101 artists' proposals submitted) . The financing for this
project is a combination of public art money and a family memorial
contribution (given solely for this project) . All of these funds have
been commingled into the Public Art Fund. There are many other
examples of such jointly funded projects, such as "The Cat and the
Fiddle" and "Garnet" .
If the proposal to transfer Public Art Funds into the General Fund is
approved there most certainly cannot be a transfer of the private funds
into the City's operating budget. We strongly urge the Council not to
transfer any of this money into the General Fund. By so transferring
previously designated dollars into the General Fund the City is
reneging on its promise not the use Public Art Funds for operating
expenses. Further, the City is discouraging public citizens from
participating in the Public Art Program by donating freely with the
comfort that their funds will be used with the previously promised City
funds. we feel that this proposal sets a devastating precedent as it
relates to the viability of the Public Art Program.
We urge you not to transfer funds from the Public Art Fund into the
General Fund.
Marta Peluso, Executive Director, ARTS Obispo/SLO County Arts Council
Ann Ream, Chairperson, Art in Public Places Committee
To:
J. Marx, Mayor
J. Ashbaugh
K. Smith
D. Carpenter
CC. K. Lichtig
From: Richard Kranzdorf[SMTP:RKRANZDO@CALPOLY.EDU)
Sent: Monday, April 18, 2011 3 :55:18 PM
To: Council, S1oCity
Cc 'Pete Evans'
Subject: Natural Resources Manager
Auto forwarded by a Rule
Dear Councilmembers,
I am concerned about the possible downgrading of the Natural Resources
Manager when Neil Havlik retires. The concern is based on the scuttle
that the position will be folded into the Parks and Recreation
Department.
I know budgetary considerations are of critical importance. The
question, as you are all aware, is where should the shrinkage come
from. After the financial enhancement of the. City Manager position, I
would be disappointed if any shortfall came from the area of natural
resources.
Cordially,
Richard Kranzdorf
A
From:Helene Finger[SMTP:HFINGER@SBCGLOBAL.NET]
Sent: Tuesday, April 19, 2011 7:19:11 AM
To: Council, SloCity
Subject: Bob Jones Trail Connection
Auto forwarded by a Rule
Dear Mayor and City Council Members,
Thank you for all of your hard work on this cycle's budget. I appreciate your time in
helping to promote completion of the Bob Jones Trail. Subsequent to our individual
discussions last week, I spoke with Peggy Mandeville and learned that in support of the
Major City Goal addressing Traffic Congestion Relief, the Capital Improvement Plan
includes funding for the project to complete the connection of the Prado Rd. to LOVR
section of the trail. This item is located on page B 1-41 of the staff report for the April 12,
2011 meeting and is titled, "Bob Jones Bike Bridge Connection to LOVR".
I strongly encourage you to support keeping this project in the budget, since it will
complete the design for the final 800 ft of trail needed to connect the existing trail
from Prado Rd to LOVR. The project will then be "shovel ready" and an excellent
candidate for grant funding for the construction phase. This construction grant funding is
listed on page B2-23 as "Bob Jones City to Sea Trail Los Osos Valley Road Bridge".
I also strongly encourage you to keep funding in the budget for the "missing link" in
the trail from LOVR to the Octagon Barn,page B1-41, "Bob Jones Trail: Octagon
Barn to LOVR". As I mentioned last week, the City has applied for a Community Based
Transportation Planning grant for this, shown on page B2-23 as "Bob Jones Trail
Octagon Bam to LOVR" to cover the majority of the planning cost for this project, and
the City plans to apply for grant funding for the construction phase as well.
Best regards,
Helene Finger
San Luis Obispo Resident
From: Sandra Rowley (mailto:macsar99@yahoo.com]
Sent: Monday, April 18, 20116:50 PM
To: Jan Marx; Ashbaugh, John; Carter, Andrew; Smith, Kathy; Carpenter, Dan
Cc: Lichtig, Katie
Subject: Neighborhood Wellness Previous Efforts
Dear Mayor Marx and Members of the Council,
While becoming reacquainted with the attached May 2008 Staff Report, I was reminded
what an excellent plan it was both for noise abatement and code enforcement. If the plan
had been implemented in its entirety back then, I believe further neighborhood decline
would have been avoided and neighborhood livability would have improved
significantly. But that, as they say, is water under the bridge.
Several of the planned strategies and programs have been implemented: update of the
Noise Ordinance,reduction of police response times, and establishment of a second code
enforcement officer position,to name a few. However, much of this was done piecemeal
without a large part of the primary structure(the neighborhood police patrols)being put
in place. The result lacks the cohesiveness of the original plan.
I hope the solution agreed upon for the Neighborhood.Wellness goal adds that needed
cohesion-- someone who works directly with residents to identify problems and trends
that negatively impact their quality of life, coordinates with other departments and
provides input to strategies designed to fix those problems.
Thank you for your time and attention.
Sincerely,
Sandra Rowley
SLO Resident
P.S. I did not recall that business signs were identified as a major problem in the city in
2008 while Home Occupation Permits and the existence of unsanctioned types of home
occupations were not.
From: Lichtig, Katie RED FILE
Sent: Thursday, April 14, 20116:24 PM MEETIIN.G AGENDA
To: Department Heads DATE-,Y' ITEM
Cc: Cano, Elaina; Lynch, Barbara
Subject: deferred CIP projects
Mayor and Council:
At Councilmember Carter's request I am forwarding the list of projects that were deferred beyond
FY 2015-16. Please feel free to let us know if you have questions.
BCC: CC
Katie E. Lichtig
City Manager
City of San Luis Obispo, CA haw09y: eman.-
a gW a a CDDDIR
990 Palm Street a Qr1 MGR a FtrCM D
San Luis Obispo, CA 93401-3249 0 aATrORM o DM
805-781-7114 a FMa PAW&RWDIR
° TMS o uranin
www.slocity.org ° ''iEWTAW aHRDM
a =CMNM 0 COUNCa
a CMUGR
a CUMK
I
CIP Projects deferred beyond 2015-16
Playground Equipment Maintenance 25,000
Park Resroom Remodel/Replacement 49,200
Parking Lot Pavement Maintenance 50,000
Police Station Remodel-Construction 300,000
Median Landscaping-South Street 200,000
CAD/RMS Management System Replacement(study) 153,000
Drainage Design Manual Update 175,000
Radio Handhelds and Mobile Replacements 519,000
City Hall Entry Step Replacement 100,000
Microsoft Office Upgrade 225,000
Public Safety Automatic Vehicle Locator System 87,500
Fire Station#2 Concrete Driveway (design) 11,200
EPCR Toughbook computer/accessory replacement 60,000
Fire Station#5 design 350,000
Fire Station#2 Asphalt resurface 20,000
Downtown Concrete Crosswalk Removal 300,000
Highway 227 Traffic Signal Upgrade 200,000
New Sidewalk Installation-Chorro/Ferrini, Prado 206,000
Poinsettia Walkway Repair 50,000
Replace entry steps at Ludwick Center 16,000
Laguna Lake Boat Docks& Ramp 105,000
City Hall Kiosk 17,200
Variable Air Volumn Control Units 32,200
Railroad Safety Trail Fence Maintenance 115,000
Southwest Area Annexation 140,000
Special Use Area Plan Development 140,000
Fire Station Engine Bay Door Safety System 83,000
Laguna Lake Shoreline Stabilization 185,000
Marsh Street 2-way Conversion (study) 15,000
3,929,300
illllllllll��������lllllll ll� hed -em
a
l
:o
C�UNCIL a CDDDIR
G FrrDIR
13
o FIRE CHIEF Id
F
ATrORNEY o PWDIR
Lo PouCECC
O
IR�mcmomnbum o
ci of san Luis osis o. aamm�st tion bE aiztment. "
o CLERK
DATE: April 18, 2011 RED FILE
TO: Michael Codron MEETING AGENDA
FROM: Neil Havlik
DATE/ 11 ITEM #��r�sc.��
SUBJECT: Leveraging of Open Space Funding
Per Mayor Marx' request I have updated open space funding.amounts from the end of 2008,
which was the last time this was done in detail. The totals are as follows:
As of December 31, 2008,the City of San Luis Obispo had:
1. Expended a total of$3,850,000 of City funds (both General Fund and Enterprise Fund)
for land acquisition and resource enhancement;
2. Been awarded a total of $8,170,000 in grants for land . acquisition and resource
enhancement;
3. Obtained land dedications worth approximately$1,350,000; and
4. Obtained easements worth approximately$1,200,000 from outside agencies.
In 2009 and 2010 those amounts were added onto, as follows:
1. Expended $311,000 in City General Fund monies on the Froom Ranch purchase, and
was awarded$349,000 in outside funding for that project;
2. Expended $107,500 in City General Fund monies on the O'Connor Ranch easement
acquisition to be held by the Land Conservancy, and was awarded $850,000 in outside
funding for that project;
3. Obtained land dedications worth $38,000
4. Obtained a management agreement for 78 acres of Bureau of Land Management
property,valued at$156,000.
Therefore the updated figures through the end of 2010 are that the City of San Luis Obispo has:
1. Expended a total of$4,268,500 of City funds (both General Funds and Enterprise Fund)
for land acquisition and resource enhancement;
2. Been awarded a total of $9,369,000 in grants for land acquisition and resource
enhancement;
3. Obtained land dedications worth approximately$1,388,000; and
4. Obtained easements or other land management agreements worth approximately
$1,356,000 from outside agencies.
The above translates into a "leveraging average" of$2.84 of outside funding support for every
$1.00 in City funds utilized.
michaei codron memo2
RED FILE
From: Christine Mulholland
Sent: Sunday, April 17, 2011 11:15 AM — MEETING AGENDA
To: Council—ALL DATE �f "1 ITEM # OLe&mse,�
Subject: budget/Natural Resources Manager proposal
Dear Mayor and members of the Council,
I empathize with your difficult budget struggles. In my first budget
cycle while on the Council, we cut 20%, $5 million from the $35 million
General Fund. No fun at all.
But I have also been among those who worked hard to maintain a strong
and healthy natural environment for SLO. The establishment of the
Natural Resources Program and Manager position and the terrific work of
conserving open spaces for preservation and passive recreation has
earned the strong support of the citizens in every survey done by the
city since, including the Measure Y polling .
It has not been a smooth ride, however. Time after time, proposals
have come forward to weaken the program, and citizens have had to fight
to maintain the vision for the long term. The Park and Recreation
Department is focused on active recreation and does not have the same
goals and passion for protecting natural resources.
I believe that the Ranger Program should be under the supervision of
the Natural Resources Manager. But I also believe putting the program
under the direction of Parks and Recreation would be a huge mistake.
In the long term, I think there will be continuing pressure to
undermine the importance of protecting open spaces for natural and
passive uses.
Cut funding for new acquisitions, if you must.. But please do not
weaken the intent of the Natural Resources Program by putting it under
the direction of the department charged with active recreation
programs.
Sincerely,
Christine Mulholland herd ems:
o COUNCD. o CDD DIR
o CITY MGR o FIT DM.
o ASSTCM a FIRECHMF
O ATTORNEY ePWDM
e CLERRIORIG o POLICECW
o PM a PARKS&RECDIR
o TRIBUNE o unLDIR
o MVTBM o HRDM
o nD Cn Y NM u COUNaL
a C17YMGR
U CLERK
7
From: Lichtig, Katie == RED FILE
Sent: Monday, April 11, 20115:33 PM — MEETING AGENDA
To: Department Heads DATE'thlbL ITEM
Cc: Cano, Elaina
Subject: Policy Questions for April 12
Mayor and Council:
Attached is a memo from me and Mary about the high level policy questions that the Council will
be facing tomorrow night.As requested by Jan we hope this will give be an appropriate"Map
Quest"set of questions that will help guide us through the major policy questions/directions
needed for the next step in the budget.formulation process. FYI, Andrew provided some other
questions for us today and we are still working on pulling the information together but will
hopefully have that out ASAP. Please let me know if you have other questions.
Katie E. Lichtig
City Manager
City of San Luis Obispo, CA
990 Palm Street had co : '
COUNCIL
San Luis Obispo, CA 93401-3249 a CMMOR o VITW
o Cr1YMOR a FITDIR
a AWCM o FWCW
o ATTORNEY a PWDIR
o CLERRlORIO a POLICECNIBF
o FIB a MM&REC DIR
0 TRIBUNE a U7ILDIR
o NEWTIMES a HRDIR
o MDCrryNEWS a COUNCIL
a crIYMOR
a CLERK
council mcmoRAnbum
April 11, 2011
TO: Mayor and City Council
FROM: Katie Lichtig, City Manager
Mary Bradley, Interim Finance & IT Director
SUBJECT: Policy Direction Needed at April 12, 2011 Strategic Budget Direction meeting
As Council is aware, at the April 12, 2011 meeting, staff will be seeking policy direction on
several budget related matters. The budget balancing strategy proposed by staff is not the only
policy direction needed,but it does represent the largest portion. In its simplest sense, the budget
balancing strategy is like a pie. Each piece of the pie makes up the whole — and for every piece
that gets smaller, another piece must get bigger. In our budget balancing "pie" we have four
components:
• Capital Improvement Plan investments
• Revenue enhancements
• Operating budget reductions, and
• Personnel cost reductions (employee concessions/contributions to reduce on-going
personnel costs).
Staff is looking to the Council to provide policy direction on whether the way the pie is proposed
to be sliced is appropriate. Conceptually, any changes to the size of one piece of the pie will
impact one or more of the other slices. Therefore, as the policy direction questions are answered,
if changes are made staff needs the Council's input on which component(s) should increase or
decrease.
Specifically, staff needs policy direction in the following areas:
1. Does the Council concur with the Key Sustainability Principles that we used to develop a
plan for long-term financial sustainability?
2. Capital Improvement Plan
• Does a majority of the Council concur with the level of investment proposed for the
five-year Capital Improvement Plan and the phased approach?
■ Does it appropriately reflect Major City Goals and.Measure Y priorities?
■ Are there any projects that should be included or excluded?
■ If a majority of Council wishes to change the level of investment in the CIP, please
tell us if you want to impact enhanced revenues, operating budget reductions, or
personnel cost reductions.
I l
Council Memorandum: Strategic Budget Direction Page 2
3. Revenue Enhancements
■ Are there any of the proposed revenue enhancements that a majority of Council
does not want to pursue at this time?
■ If so,please tell us whether you want to increase operating budget reductions or
personnel cost reductions/employee concessions in place of the revenue proposed.
4. Significant Operating Program Changes
■ Are there any of the Significant Operating Program Changes which add costs to the
General Fund that a Council majority do not want to include in the 2011-13 Financial
Plan?
5. Operating Budget Reductions
■ Are there any operating budget reductions recommended that a majority of Council
believes should not be included in our budget balancing strategy?
■ If Council does not wish to include:one of the recommended options,you may direct
staff to select another budget seduction which is not currently recommended or
increase the amount attributed to personnel cost reductions.
The complete list of operating budget reduction options developed by staff is included in
the report as Attachment 5.
6. Personnel Cost Reductions/Employees Concessions
■ Is the $2.1 million of proposed personnel cost reductions (employee
concessions/contributions to reduce on-going personnel costs)acceptable?
7. Does the Council support the use of the $1.6 million in excess reserves estimated to be
available at the end of 2010-11 for the one-time purposes identified?
8. Should the Golf Fund be transitioned from an Enterprise Fund to a Special Revenue
Fund?
9. Should we consider organizational efficiencies and cost savings related to the Natural
Resources and Parks and Recreation programs?
10. Should the City Clerk pilot program be made permanent?
Policy Direction Not Required:
1. Council does not need to approve the individual capital projects included in the CIP at
this time.
2. Formal approval of the revenue enhancement options is not needed; it will be included
with budget adoption in June.
3. Specific labor relations strategies for staffing cost reductions (employee
concessions/contributions to reduce on-going personnel costs). These strategies will be
developed and discussed with Council in closed session in July or August.
ZC A0
RED FILE
- MEETING AGENDA
DATEI / ITEM # 9 tsU:)
Sunday April 17, 2011
Dear Mayor Marx and Members of, the City Council,
This letter is to rebut the Tribune Editorial of today. I have enclosed
a copy for your convience.
I believe that Deb Linden does .not; want; any Neighborhood Services
Specialists because she wants more Police Officers instead, thus her order
for a parking officer.
The DARE program is fine but if families continue to flee SLO City
as they have been then there will not be a need for a DARE program or
even any schools. We need a strong program that will attract families not:
any more students as the realtors keep advertising for.
It is well understood that rundown, blight ridden neighborhoods do not
bring top dollar in the real estate market;.
Rundown neighborhoods invite crime, vandalism, gang activity, drug
dealing and rat infestations. .., :.': :: .Which our City has already been
experiencing':for many years now.
Fortunately, the City seems to have a good graffiti clean-up program
thanks to volunteers.
hard co email:
C COUN t. aCDDljm Sincerely,
a cny OR n Fff DDI.
o AWCM o ME CWF
c ATTORNEY c PWDIR
o C Zt=RIG a POLICE CHIEF
a PIB o PARKS&WDIR
o TRIBUNE o UTILDIR v
o NEW a TYN cO DDt v"" • V- !�
D SLOCffYNEWS o COUNCIL
o CDYMGR
o CLERK
San Luis Obispo.
CA 93406
lettrOthe '- Bruce G.Ray Sandra Duerr
tribimenewsxrom Publisher Executive Ediborr 1
Phone:781.7933 Stephanie Flnucane
Fax:781-7905 Opinion Page Editor
66 THE TIZIBUN]r' APRIL 17, 2OIZ
Ortialo>v Esc - SUNDAY ' S►AONDAY I " TUESDAY INEDNESD9YFIURSDAY
scaeauL ieoriardPtts _ .-zkatltieeri.Parker PaulTUugmdn Daniya7ters OavtdBrooks Etiarles
y •
EDITORIAL OPINION OF THE TRIBUNE
An arguably good idea
whose time as not come
alk about mixedhood wellness goal"to include
messages. On the There's no money in SLO the new positions.
one hand, the city But if it doesn't have the
of San Luis Obispo for neighborhood specialists money,why even go there?
warns of the need Why raise expectations,
to cut $4.4 million from the lege students. legally parked cars and the when city officials say they.
budget Yet in the next breath, Meanwhile, though, the like. cannot maintain the level of
it wants to add four positions city may not be able to afford We have consistently sup- service provided now?
to advance the cause of some- a DARE officer for elementary ported city efforts to curb Another problem: Police
thing referred to by the and middle schools, it may such violations with measures Chief Deborah Linden does
touchy-feely term of"neigh- start charging residents for such as a more stringent noise not want neighborhood spe-
borhood wellness." street sweeping and ifs talk- ordinance, and a social host cialists to issue citations for
In more concrete terms, ing about reducing support for ordinance to curb underage noise violations.
neighborhood wellness means the special.events that bring drinking. "Many of these situations
cracking down on noise, row- tourists to town—helping to But this latest proposal— involve alcohol, and I feel
dy parties, building and park- generate the sales and bed which appears to have been strongly that those situations
ing code violations and other taxes that provide revenue for driven largely by Residents for need to be handled by police
problem behavior. ' city operations. Quality Neighborhoods — officers."
Or, in the words of Mayor In better times, adding flies in the face of another city That would appear to tie the
Jan Marx,ifs preventing parts neighborhood services spe- goal: to adopt a fiscally pru- hands of neighborhood spe-
of San Luis Obispo from be- cialists might be a decent idea dent budget cialists in,many situations.
coming"like IsIa Nista".. As we've often said, we To be fair,the City Council Bottom line: If the city's
To do that, the city envi- sympathize mightily with res- hasn't actually budgeted for budget situation is truly dire
sions adding four "neighbor- idents who have to put up these four new positions, —and wedon't doubt that itis
hood services specialists"who with boorish behavior in their which will cost an estimated — it should stop fantasizing
would concentrate on.problem neighborhoods —vandalism, $236,400 per year. about adding positions that it
areas — specifically, those 'rowdy parties, trespassing, It has, however, directed cannot afford and concentrate
with high percentages of col-' 'barking dogs, loud music, il- staff to rewrite the "neighbor- on balancing the budget
From: Lichtig, Katie .=- RED FILE
Sent: Wednesday, April 13, 2011 11:40 AM — MEETING AGENDA
To: Stanwyck, Shelly DATEAT14 I 1 ITEM # M'✓&V1.9,ev
Cc: Cano, Elaina
Subject: FW: Golf Customer Demographics
Mayor and Council:
Here is some additional data about the users of the Golf Course. This information is provided at
the Mayor's request.
BCC: CC
herd covr. eman:
Katie E. Lichtig o COMM o�DM'�
CHU
City Manager o o AMCM DM
City of San Luis Obispo, CA o CLERSIGRiG aPi]C&
a PD3 o PAWC58REC ECDDt
990 Palm Street a NEWTUTMEM cHRDM
o NEWTIIe[ES o tneDne
o SMCMNM aOOUNCM
San Luis Obispo, CA 93401-3249 aa7YMGR
o CLERK
805-781-7114
www.slocity.ora
From: Stanwyck, Shelly
Sent: Wednesday, April 13, 20118:55 AM
To: Lichtig, Katie
Cc: Bunte,Todd; Bohlken, Sheridan; Bradley, Mary; Malicoat, Debbie; Codron, Michael
Subject: Golf Customer Demographics
Katie —
You had inquired yesterday about the customer demographics at the Laguna
Lake Golf Course. I wanted to get back to you on that in case a Council member
needed this information.
Since May 2009 we have entered approximately 10,000 customers into a
database at Laguna Lake Golf Course. Our volunteers and part time staff
perform this task when taking round reservations. At this time there is a
significant margin of error as 22.5% of the customers' residence information has
not been collected and our Cal Poly students often provide their permanent (out
of City) residence information. Of the customers for whom we have data for the
break out is follows:
45% City Residents
28% County Residents
37% Out of County Residents.
This information will be covered in the annual Golf Fund Report in June and we
will continue to track it as well as see if we can delve deeper about our
customers. Please let me know if you require further information.
Shelly Stanwyck
Parks and Recreation Director
City of San Luis Obispo
1341 Nipomo.Street
San Luis Obispo, CA 93401
sstanwvcCalslocitv.org
805-781-7294
_; .. M10ma Wdght I
Ud,�,CA
,3405-,6,2 , April 15, 2011
Dear Mayor Marx and Members of the City Council,
Thank you so much for supporting R.Q.N. !
Your support of R.Q.N. is the first support that we have had in-.&.years
since Rob Bryn our wonderful Neighborhood Services Manger left the cities
employment.
R,.Q.N. has been the backbone of the city for over 20 years. The
organization was created to be a watchdog for the City Council because we
all live here and always want what is best for our wonderful City.
In the past 8 years With R.Q.N. being ignored, neighborhoods have
deteriorated considerably and police calls have increased from 11800 under
Rob Bryns guidence to 3,000 police calls per year! Over objections from staff
R.Q.N'. was finally listened to when we insisted that the system of fines
be increased for noise violations.
You all have a huge job to do and R.Q.N. will be behind you to
support; you in any way we can,
hard coemam. RED FILE
o COUNCIL RED CDD DIR
cASSTC
o Acrry SSTC GR u RTMR MEETING AGENDA
M o FIRECNIEF
o "" " °Poua DATE i9 ITEM # 83 acs s�
a cLERKroatc o PoucE clnEe
c PB c PARKSkRECMR
o NEWS aHRMRR Sincerely,
v SIA CRY NEWS o COUNCIL
o CITY MGR
o CLERK
P. S. Enclosed is a letter that I wrote to the Tribune editor to try to
clear up some, miconceptions.
i
1 _
April 14, .2011
to the editor,
Refering to the Tribune article 4-14 Request to address bligA �.�nPraced
Residents for Quality Neighborhoods, .a 20 year old organization, has
been begging the city of ShO for help in solving it's blight and noise
problems for many years.
Neighborhood Services Specialists being hires would be a good first
step and the City Council seems to support employing them.
R.Q.N. was told that if we supported measure F, we would get police
patrols im our neighborhoods. This never happened.
R.Q.N. members have researched what other college towns about the size
of of SLO have done. All have told us that their 1Reighborhood Services
Specialist programs have been veary.. .:effectltre and no:..onbzizaver been harmed
while preforming their duties.
The City Council put an emphasis on creating head of household jobs.
Hiring NSS employees would be filling head of household jobs.
Rental licenaeefees of over. $20090000 collected by the city needs to
be returned' to the neighborhoods to pay the salries .of Neighborhood Services
Specialists.
I would like to thank Mayor Marx and Members of the City Council for
supporting hiring Neighborhood Services Specialists.
Sincerely
Naoma Wright
400 Foothill Blvd.
Slo , CA. 93405
543-5232
RED FILE
MEETING AGENDA
From: "Carter, Andrew" <ancarter(a- slocity.org> DATE`& I ITEM # 23 Q&/iSaz�
Date: April 13, 2011 10:29:26 AM GMT-07:00
To: "Lichtig, Katie" <klichtig-aslocity.org>, "Hines, Charlie" <chines(a slocitororg>,
"Dietrick, Christine" <cdietrickaa.slocitv.org>
Subject: FW: Fire Department or Rescue Squad?
BCC to Council
Please see below an e-mail I sent Katie and Charlie in January. It references (and provides a link
to) a Governing magazine article on fire department organization.
I'm sending this information to you as a follow up to our discussion last night about
"organizational review consultant services." That's the decision we made to do one assessment
during the next two years instead of two.
I would strongly recommend that that assessment be done of the Fire Department.
From the Service Categorization study, we were reminded that just 12% of FD calls involve
structure fires. 68% are for medical response, 5% are for rescue, 1% are for Haz Mat, and 15%
are for other. Per the Service Categorization study, "Emergency Response" costs for the FD are
$8.0M. Total costs are $9.7M.
My concem is that FD is organized and operated (staffing and equipment) as a fire department
when its primary mission is emergency services (medical, rescue, other). I worry specifically
about the potential wasted dollars tied to that. That concern has only been heightened by the
knowledge that we have purchased a very expensive (to own and operate) 100-foot ladder truck
which is being primarily used as a 100-foot rescue squad.
On top of this is the fact that FD has by far our highest overtime costs. As you know, an on-
going interest of mine is the concept of trained reserve firefighters as a tool to reduce OT. Most
local fire departments use reserve firefighters, we don't. hard eio i:
a COUNCIL a CDDDIR
Andrew Carter a cmMaR a FrrDM
FM
Council Member c ,MRW a PWDM
City of San Luis Obispo a CLSUMRIG a MICECMF
a PM a PAW&RECDIR
DIR_
mCOUN
From; Carter; Andrew a Naw�a
o SI.GCnYNEWS a CGUNClL
Sent: Wednesday, January 05, 2011 11:11 PM a CrrrMGR
To: Hines, Charlie; Lichtig, Katie a CUMK
Subject: Fire Department or Rescue Squad?
From the current online issue of"Governing" magazine and of interest to me:
One of the big questions right now is whether the fire service is actually learning anything amidst
the constant threat of cuts, especially about smarter ways to deploy resources in an era of
shrinking budgets and departments. While police departments, especially in larger cities, have
embraced a more sophisticated and data-driven approach to the work they do -- allowing them
to maintain relatively high performance levels -- there's been less willingness on the fire service's
part to embrace data as a way to revamp how fire suppression, EMS and other calls are handled.
For the most part, firefighting is still based on geographically distributed, fixed stations staffed by
a set number of personnel who stand by and wait to be dispatched when needed. For the fire
service to continue to perform in these leaner times, Wieczorek says, it is now going to have to
actively embrace change-- and that's not something that comes easily to the fire service. "The
old saying in the fire service,"Wieczorek says, "is'100 years of tradition unimpeded by
progress."'
One of the most-significant and widely recognized changes in the fire and rescue service is that
on average, most calls to fire departments now are for medical emergencies and not fires --
running about 80 percent EMS to 20 percent fire in mdst jurisdictions where the fire service
handles both. At the same time, most calls are either false alarms or not particularly serious. Yet
too few fire departments have adapted very well to these realities. For example, San Jose still
sends an attack pumper with a full complement of four firefighters to all emergency medical
calls.
Tying up four firefighters and a rig for what usually winds up being minor medical emergencies
doesn't make any sense, says Bruce Hoover, chief of the Fargo Fire Department in North Dakota.
Fargo's protocols used to mirror San Jose's exactly. But now Fargo fire trucks only roll if"there's
bleeding, breathing complications or trauma," Hoover says. "We now only respond for true
medical emergencies, and that's cut our run count back by 1,000 a year, and has kept apparatus
and manpower in place for real emergencies."
But asking tough questions about manpower and deployment is difficult for many municipal
officials who don't feel confident tangling with the community's best and bravest. A way to do
that, however, without going toe-to-toe with the fire service, Wieczorek says, is simply to ask
departments for solid, up-to-date data on demand, along with what measurable results a city is
getting for its fire service dollars..
What most municipalities will find when they start to ask good questions about budgets,
deployment and service demands is that there aren't many answers to those questions. "We are
routinely called into communities to look at manpower and deployment,"Wieczorek says. "We
find across the board in small and large jurisdictions that data is either nonexistent or totally
wrong."
What drives firefighting in the U.S., for the most part, is long-standing practice, not good, current
information on what's actually happening on the ground, including number of calls, response
times, seriousness of the incident, geographical distribution and time of day, all measured in
relation to the geometry of fire service manpower, equipment and deployment.
For example, in one jurisdiction that asked the ICMA to come in and do a thorough analysis of
demand, resources and deployment, the ICMA team looked at the busiest five minutes the fire
department had in a year. What did the team find? Even at its busiest moment of the year, the
city still had seven idle units standing by ready to respond, with 28 available firefighters.Those
are just the sorts of analyses -- in combination with the current budget crisis -- that have
emboldened policymakers and budget writers to start asking tougher questions about what fire
departments realty need and how they do business -- and asking them to either hold the line on
budgets or cut back.
Looking at both budgets and at more creative and data-driven ways to handle staffing and
deployment are key. "Don't get caught up in the hysteria trap of believing that if you
pursue things like brownouts and budget cuts that children are going to die and senior
citizens will burn up,"Wieczorek says. "That might happen,but only if we keep doing
business in the same old ways."
Here's the link to the entire article htto://www.governing.com/topics/public-
workforce/firefighters-feel-saueeze-shrinking-budgets.html
Andrew Carter
Council Member
City of San Luis Obispo
April 15, 201 1
Dear Mayor Marx and Members of the City Council ,
Thank you so much for supporting R .Q .N .:
Your support of R .Q .N . is the first support that we have had in'8 'year s
since Rob Bryn our wonderful Neighborhood Services Manger left the citie s
employment .
R .Q .N . has been the backbone of the city for over 20 years . The
organization was created to be a watchdog for the City Council because w e
all live here and always want what is best for our wonderful City .
In the past 8 years With R .Q .N .being ignored, neighborhoods hav e
deteriorated considerably and police calls have increased from 1,800 unde r
Rob Bryns guidence to 3,000 police calls per year : Over objections from staff ,
R .Q .N . was finally listened to when we insisted that the system of fine s
be increased for noise violations .
You all have a huge job to do and R .Q .N . will be behind you t o
support you in any way we can .
RED FIL E
MEETING AGENDA
DATEY////, ITEM #$3'is e
Sincerely ,
P .S . Enclosed is a letter that I wrote to the Tribune editor to try t o
clear up sort g miconceptions .
hard copy:email :
a COUNCIL a CDD DI Ra CITY MGR a FIT DI Ra ASST CM a FIRE CHIEFa ATTORNEY a PW DIRa CLERK/MUG a POLICE CHIEFa PIB D PARKS &RECDI Ra TRIBUNE a UTIL DIRa NEW TIMES a HR DI R
a SLO CITY NEWS a COUNCI L
a CITY MGR
a CLERK
April 14,201 1
to the editor ,
Refering to the Tribune article 4-14 Request to address blig i la gfg raced .
Residents for Quality Neighborhoods,.a 20 year old organization, ha s
been begging the city of SLO for help in solving it's blight and nois e
problems for Many years .
Neighborhood Services Specialists being hired would be a good firs t
step and the City Council seems to support employing them .
R .Q .N . was told that if we supported measure we would get polic e
patrols im our neighborhoods . This never happened .
R .Q .N . members have researched what other college towns about the siz e
of of SLO have done . All have told us that their Neighborhood Service s
Specialist programs have been very-effective and no .onbE.has14ver been harme d
while preforming their duties .
The City Council put an emphasis on creating head of household jobs .
Hiring NSS employees would be filling head of household jobs .
Rental licenseefees of over . $200,000, collected by the city needs to
be returned to the neighborhoods to pay the salries of Neighborhood Service s
Specialists .
I would like to thank Mayor Marx and Members of the City Council fo r
supporting hiring Neighborhood Services Specialists .
Sincerel y
Naoma Wrigh t
400 Foothill Blvd .
Slo, CA . 9340 5
543-5232