The existing Agreement (Resolution 64224, adopted 2/6/2001) with the City of East Palo Alto for supplemental law enforcement and public safety communications services expired June 30, 2002. As part of the Sheriff's FY 2002-03 budget reduction plan approved by the Board, it was proposed to accelerate elimination of the existing County subsidy for East Palo Alto law enforcement and public safety communications. As the first step, reimbursement to the Sheriff's Office would be increased by 100%, or doubled, for FY 2002-03. This would be accomplished by a one-year Amendment to the existing agreement, with provision of an option for the County Manager and City Manager to mutually negotiate a future extension with revised payment terms.
The proposed Amendment was reviewed with the County Manager's Office, and reviewed as to form by County Counsel, and was discussed with Police Chief Wes Bowling, who supported the concept. It has taken somewhat longer to secure actual execution of the Amendment due to the departure of the City's former manager during the summer. An acting City Manager, Sandra Salerno, was eventually appointed in the late Fall, while the City recruits for a permanent administrator. The Amendment was subsequently placed on the Council Agenda, and was approved and executed by the City on November 27, 2002. |
The Amendment provides for reimbursement of $528,280 for Sheriff's Office law enforcement services, and $473,138 for communications dispatch, for a total FY 2002-03 reimbursement of $1,001,418. This represents an increase of $282,338, or 40%, over the City's FY 2001-02 total contract payments. Within this total, the Sheriff's Office reimbursements are doubled while reimbursement to Public Safety Communications increases by $18,198. The total cost of supplemental law enforcement and communications services is approximately $2,336,820. Thus, a subsidy of $1,335,400 remains for 2002-03.
The Amendment is for one year, expiring June 30, 2003. The amendment also provides that the County Manager and City Manager may mutually negotiate and seek agreement for an extension of up to three additional years, with revisions to payment terms and/or service changes, through a written amendment. In recent discussions with the City, it has been emphasized that with the present budget crisis facing the County, it is imperative that the current subsidy must be eliminated through some combination of increased reimbursements from the City and/or reductions in service levels. City officials have indicated they understand the fiscal situation and are prepared to address the subsidy issue directly. It is believed the City will require supplemental law enforcement services for about three more years, after which they hope the current economic downturn will have reversed, and the anticipated revenue growth from major commercial developments in the City will have fully materialized. Whether or not some continuing future level of supplemental law enforcement support is desired after that, it seems likely the police department would, at minimum, benefit from continuing to contract for public safety communications. It is proposed that a subcommittee of the Board of Supervisors be established to provide policy guidance in negotiations with the City.
While financial considerations are clearly a primary issue in any discussion regarding the County's role in City law enforcement services, it is also important to understand the historical context of the Sheriff's role in City law enforcement services. On two occasions in past decades we have withdrawn Sheriff's personnel from City service, but eventually had to return, at both the City's request and the Board's direction, in order to protect the safety and property of County citizens. Each return to City service has strained department resources, since during the intervening years positions were eliminated; resources were reduced; and personnel knowledgeable about City police operations were dispersed throughout other areas of the department or left County service.
East Palo Alto comprises less than 4% of the County's total population, but according to the most recent Department of Justice statistics, 60% of the County's homicides; 17% of forcible rapes; 13% of assaults; and 17% of armed robberies occur within the City, while gang-related violence and intimidation remains a significant problem in some neighborhoods. Areas of the City continue to draw buyers from much of the southern half of the County for drug sales, which in turn leads to other related crimes against persons and property. It is also known from prior experience that if left unchecked, these criminal activities will spill over into surrounding City and unincorporated communities.
Therefore, it is important that whatever future agreement as to services is reached, that agreement is not only financially sound, but also provides the framework for a lasting solution to the City's law enforcement needs. |
Revenue from the Amendment is included within the Sheriff's Office and EPS Public Safety Communications 2002-03 budget, and the City has already paid for the first half-year of service through the December property tax levy, which has been the historical method of payment. There is no increase in budgeted net County cost from approval of this Amendment.
Cc Mary Welch, Director of Employee & Public Services
Jaime Young, Public Safety Communications Manager |
