The URL can be used to link to this page

Home My WebLink About03/06/1990, 4 - AN ORDINANCE TO ESTABLISH A COST RECOVERY PROGRAM FOR SECOND RESPONSES BY POLICE PERSONNEL TO NOISE I��N�►�►IIINIIIIIIIIII,lulu MEETING DATE: �p�u►I city of san tins oBtspo 03-08-90 NNOZA COUNCIL AGENDA REPORT ITEM N ER: F130]k James K Gardiner, Chief of Police SUBJECT. An ordinance to establish a cost recovery program for second responses by police personnel to noise disturbances. GAO RECONMONDATION. Introduce ordinance to print establishing a cost recovery program for second responses by Police personnel to noise disturbances. DISCUSSION: One of the major demands on police services in our community is response to noise disturbances. The Department responded to 1,994 complaints in 1988 and 2,182 in 1989. The vast majority involve Pete Pthermgs and Parties. Very often these events have a large number of participants, 11184Y of whom are in various states of intoxication. Due to the potential hazards posed by this type of group, a minimum of two Police officers are dispatched for a fast-call response. In larger parties, often four or five patrol units and a field supervisor are necessary to quiet these disturbance& Unfortunately, it has often been the case that after the initial disturbance has been abated and the officers have left, the persons responsible for the gathering wM allow it to begin again. This usually creates a second caR within a short period of time necessitating a number of patrol units to return to the location While enforcement of the noise ordinances and other applicable violations are actively pursued, the Department believes that the person responsible for creating this disruption of the public peace and second response should bear the costs of these police services. They are above and beyond those normally provided. We feel that in addition to cost recovery, one of the primary benefits wrll be the deterrent effect after a first response to a disturbance. A number of agencies who have adopted similar ordinances have seen reductions of over 50% in the number of repeat responses. The recommended ordinance wiII for a written Provide warning to be given to the person responsible for the disturbance at the time of the initial police response. In the event this person is a minor, the parents or guardians of the minor will be the responsible person. Cost recovery would apply to a second response within a twenty four hour period. These persons wit be liable for the City's costs of personnel and equipment up to a maximum of$500.00 for each subsequent response. There wM be no charge assessed for cost recovery for the initial response and warning. Regardless of the ordinance, the City may separately pursue compensation for any injury to police personnel or damage to City equipment. The cost recovery Program would be administered in the Department similar to the current program for persons arrested for driving under the influence. CLTEM DYPU76 The Proposed ordinance was reviewed with the Chairman of the Student Community Liaison Committee and the President of the Interfratermty Council. While they were concerned that the ordinance be used with discretion, they understood the reasons for development of the ordinance and do not oppose its adoption. 1 �_I city of sai Luis OBispo - ONGS COUNCIL AGENDA REPORT FISCAL WPACT: Actual cost recovery will be dependent upon the number of second responses. Currently, the Department responds to approximately 60 second responses a year. If the maximum charge of $500.00 was billed, this would result in an annual cost recovery of approximately $50,000. Since the objective of this ordinance is to reduce the number of second responses, it would be desirable that the revenue recovered be negligible. Administration of this program would come under existing General Funds for Patrol Services on page D-6 of the 1989-91 Financial Plan. ALTERNATIVE L The Council could choose not to adopt this ordinance. The Department would continue to respond to calls and take appropriate enforcement action under existing ordinances and state law. We would not be able to charge back for these second response police services. ATTACEMEKM: 1. Ordinance 2. Notification form (draft) 2 /f_� ORDINANCE NO. (19.90 Series) AN ORDINANCE OF THE CITY OF SAN LUIS OBISPO ADDING CHAPTER 9 . 21, SECTIONS 9 . 21: 010 THROUGH 9 .21. 050 TO THE SAN LUIS OBISPO MUNICIPAL CODE, RELATING TO CHARGES FOR POLICE SERVICES WHEREAS, City Council finds that thecontrol of large parties, gatherings or assemblages ("the events") on private property is necessary when such events are determined to be. a threat to the public peace; health, safety or general welfare; and WHEREAS, police department personnel are frequently required to make subsequent responses to the location of events in order to maintain the public peace, health, safety and general welfare; and WHEREAS, the return of police department personnel to a location constitutes a drain on personnel and resources; WHEREAS, the above situation may create a hazard to the safety of police department personnel and to the general public. NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT ORDAINED BY the Council of the City of San Luis Obispo as follows:. SECTION 1. Chapter 9 . 21, Sections 9 .21. 010 through 9 . 21. 050, is hereby added to the 'San Luis Obispo Municipal Code to read as follows: - Chapter 9.21 Second Response Cost Recovery Section 9.2.1. 010 Issuance of Written Warning. When a police officer determines that a party, gathering, or assemblage ("the event") is a threat to the public peace, health, safety or general welfare, the police officer shall issue a written warning to the person responsible for control of the. location of the event and/or the person_responsible for the event, or if either �'3 Ordinance No. (1990 Series) Page Two ' I u of those persons is a minor, the parents or guardians of that minor. Section 9 . 21. 020 Content of Warning. The written warning shall state that if police department personnel are required to return to the location of the event within the following twenty four hour period and the responding personnel determine that the subsequent event is a threat to the public peace, health, safety or general welfare, each such response shall constitute the provision of special security services. The warning shall state that the person receiving the warning shall be charged for the cost of the City providing such special security services for the event. Section 9. 21. 030 Costs-for Special Security Services. The costs of providing these special security services shall include but not be limited to all direct and indirect costs attributable to the subsequent response to the event.. Section 9. 21. 040 Collection of Costs.. The collection costs for these special security services shall not be in excess of five hundred dollars for each subsequent response. The City shall have the option to pursue any other legal remedies for recovery when such costs exceed five hundred dollars per response. Section 9 . 21. 050 Debt Owed to City. The amount of such costs charged shall be deemed a debt to the City of the person or persons responsible for use of the special Ordinance No. (1990 Series) Page Three �J security services and, if minors, their parents or guardians. Any person required to pay such costs shall be liable in an action brought in the name of the City . for recovery of such costs, including reasonable attorneys ' fees. SECTION 2 . This ordinance, approved by the City attorney, together with the ayes and noes, shall be published at least three (3) days prior to its final passage in the Telegram-Tribune, a newspaper published and circulated in said City, and the same shall go into effect at the expiration of thirty (36) days after its said final passage. INTRODUCED AND PASSED TO PRINT by the Council of the City of San Luis Obispo at the meeting held on the day of , 1990. On motion of seconded by and on the following roll call vote: AYES: NOES: ABSENT: Mayor Ron Dunin ATTEST: Pam Voges, City Clerk s ys ordinance No. (1990 Series) Page Four APPROVED: City dministrative Officer :ity At, orn y , /Police Chef Director of Finance —CO ITTACHMENT = 2 DRAFT FRONT IGOATION Or OOcLo"tE R= —... �� 1 INCIDENT 0 LAW NAY(. FlIL' -W0012 .__...._.._ ❑OMNa ❑ Hofif ❑Rofm � RP Of wom UCOaR NO DOB 3L7C 1410! !YO lfQN. q�, POO4VQNT ADORE= rrs AN Ate[ PHONE ( IBUODd= ADORE= C1TV PHONE OPwxVR O® RAM CAl1 JUVENILES PRESENT ARR=n CMUX RPI /, ❑ 1:1ADULTS PRESENT NO ❑Yes OA1OOi/= ME" GATVvlW& . I sIcau:vRa or RESPONSIBLE PARTY DISTURBANCE ADVISED!' ( CARD (REV. 2-1-90) BACK YOU, AM HEREBY NOTIFIED THAT THIS ASSEMBLAGE IS A THREAT TO THE PUBLIC PEACE, HEALTH, SAFETY AND GENERAL WELFARE (415.2 P.C.). ASA PERSON RESPONSIBLE FOR THIS EVENT, YOU WILL BE HELD LIABLE FOR THE COST OF POLICE PERSOtIIiEL AND EQUIPMENT IF OFFICERS ARE REQUIRED TO RETURN U TSN 24 HOURS TO RESTORE ORDER AND BEEP THE PEACE... . (SLO MC 9.21.050) IN ADDITION, A RETURN CALL By THE POLICE MAY RESULT IN ADDITIONAL C ; RLMINAL OR CML ACTION AGAINST YOU AND OTHER VIOLATORS. I