HomeMy WebLinkAbout2007/07/10 Item 17
CITY COUNCIL
AGENDA STATEMENT
~\'f:. CITY OF
~~CHULA VISTA
JULY 10,2007, Item In
SUBMITTED BY:
REVIEWED BY:
RESOLUTION AMENDING CHAPTER VI (A) ALARMS
OF THE CITY OF CHULA VISTA MASTER FEE
SCHEDULE. () ~
CHIEF OF POLIC~'A
CITY MANAGER
4/5THS VOTE: YES D NO ~
ITEM TITLE:
BACKGROUND
The City of Chula Vista Police Department operates the Alarm Program for the City,
which entails permitting both residences and businesses when they install a burglar alarm
system and responding to alarm activations. Alarm calls- for-service are categorized as a
Priority II response (urgent response). 99% of all alarm calls-for-service are false alarms,
and are a considerable utilization on Police Department patrol response services. The
Department collects both permit fees and false alarm penalty fees (detailed below). These
fees help offset the cost of administering the Alarm Program.
ENVIRONMENTAL REVIEW
This proposed activity has been reviewed for compliance with the California
Enviromnental Quality Act (CEQA) and it has been determined that the activity is not a
"Project" as defined under Section 15378 of the State CEQA Guidelines because it will
not result in a physical change in the enviromnent; therefore, pursuant to Section
15060(c)(3) of the State CEQA Guidelines, the activity is not subject to CEQA. Thus, no
enviromnental review is necessary.
17-1
JULY 10,2007, Item2
Page 2 of9
RECOMMENDATION
That Council conduct the public hearing and adopt the resolution amending Chapter VI
(A) ALARMS of the City ofChula Vista Master Fee Schedule, as follows:
.
Residential $25.00 $50.00
Commercial $50.00 $100.00
. .
0-2 NO CHARGE NO CHARGE
3 $25.00 $50.00
4-6 $50.00 $100.00
More than 6 $100.00 $100.00
BOARDS/COMMISSION RECOMMENDATION
Not Applicable
DISCUSSION
In reviewing the false aim data for the Growth Management Oversight Committee
(GMOC), the Department looked at ways to help reduce the number of false alms
generated in the City. As part of this review, it was decided to also review the fees
associated with the AIm Program. The costs associated with aim permitting and false
aim responses have steadily increased since the last increase of these fees in 2004. Due to
the cost of administering the AIm Program, the Department is recommending that the fees
for Aim Permits and AIm Penalties be increased.
The costs to administer the alm program were calculated using the City's standard Full
Cost Recovery (FCR) model. The FCR captures both the direct and indirect cost of
providing this service. These costs include the responding officers salary and benefits; the
Police Data Specialist' (who tracks alm permits and false alms) salary and benefits; the
cost of responding vehicles, including maintenance and fuel, as well as the equipment the
officer uses (uniform, bullet proof vest, gun, etc). The costs also include the cost for the
dispatchers' time handling the call, supervision, computer equipment, etc. As detailed
below, the total cost to provide administration of the alm program is $549,065, including
the time officers spent responding to false alms and the time the Police Data Specialist
spends handling the billing and tracking of the alm permits and false alm penalties.
These increases, if adopted, would result in a net increase of $120,000 to the Police
Department revenues. These fee and penalty increases will go to offset the total cost of both
administering the alm program and responding to false alms.
I The number offalse alanns subject to penalty is calculated based upon a rolling 12 monlb period
commencing from lbe date of lbe first false alarm
17-2
JULY 10, 2007, Item~
Page 3 of9
FALSE ALARM RESPONSE
The Alann Program is designed to track the number of alann systems installed in both
residential and commercial buildings. The program also tracks the number of false alanns in
an effort to minimize the number of times an officer (or officers) has to respond to a faIse
aIann. When alann users have more than two false alanns in a twelve month period, they
are assessed a penalty. Currently, these alann penalties do not capture the full cost of
responding to the false alanns.
In FY 2005/2006, the Police Department responded to 6,928 false alanns which correlates
to a total of 2,297 hours spent responding to false alanns. False alanns present a significant
utilization of patrol resources. Although they are not counted against the Departments
Priority II (Urgent) response times, they still require an officer to respond to the call thereby
affecting the ability to respond to other legitimate pending Priority II calls. This means that
as an officer is responding to a false alann, other Priority II calls in hislher beat will have to
wait until the alann call is cleared. This impacts the Departments ability to achieve
compliance with the Growth Management Oversight Committees' (GMOC) threshold for
Priority II response times. Often times, multiple units respond on an alann call (typically
commercial alanns - due to larger propertylbuilding size, checking roof, etc.). When the
additional units' time is factored in, the total time spent responding to alann calls jumps to
just over 3,107 hours spent responding to false alanns. This comes at a significant cost to the
City. In total, this equates to a total cost of $329,423 for officers to respond to false alanns.
Table 1 (below) details the average response time to a false alann call2.
Table 1 - Average Time Officers are Committed to False Alann Responses
Robberv - Commercial 241 0:14:19 57.3
Robberv - Residential 39 0:22:58 15.0
Buralarv - Commercial 3,794 0:18:31 1171.0
Buralarv - Residential 2,473 0:22:15 917.0
Duress Alarm -
Commercial 94 0:16:09 25.0
Duress Alarm - Residential 287 0:23:19 111.5
Total 6,928 0:19:35 2,297
Total wi additional units 3,107
2 The average response time does not include caUs that had multiple units responding to the alarm caU, nor
caUs to vehicle duress alarms.
17-3
JULY 10,2007, Heron.
Page 4 of9
AL~PERNITT~ENALTYFEES
Staff conducted a survey of the cities in San Diego County to compare Alann Permitting
Fees and Alann Penalty fees. Table 2 details the alann permit fees charged by the various
agencIes.
Table 2
ALARM PERMIT FEES BY CITY, SAN DIEGO COUNTY
Residential Commercial All Permits
Cities within San Single system Double Multiple Single system Double Multiple Renewal period
Dieeo County systems Systems systems SYStems
Carlsbad $0 $0
Chula Vista $25 $50 24 months
Chula Vrsta Proposed $50 $100 24 months
Coronado $0 $0
County of San Die1Zo $48 $48 1 time
DelMar $0 $0
EICa;on $0 $0
Encinitas $18 $54 $72 $18 $54 $72 I time
Escondida $15 $15 12 months
Imoerial Beach $35 $35 24 months
La Mesa $0 $0
Lemon Grove $18 $54 $72 $18 $54 $72 I time
National City $20 $40 24 months
Oceanside $0 $0
Poway $40 $40 1 time
San DielZo $55 $95 24 months
San Marcos $0 $0
Santee $18 $54 $72 $18 $54 $72 I time
Solana Beach $0 $0
Vista $51 $51 1 time
NOTE: Those cities that currently do not charge for pennit fees are considering changing to a fee based pennit system.
All cities require that a completed permit application be on file.
(This section blank)
17-4
JULY 10, 2007, Item~
Page 5 of9
Table 3 details the alann penalties charged by the various agencies. It should be noted that
several of the cities are currently reviewing their alann permiVpenalty fees at this time.
Table 3 - False Alann Penalty Fees by City
Carlsbad . Burglary $0 $30 $00 $60 $60 $60 $00 365 days
Cartsbad - Robbery $0 $60 $120 $120 $120 $120 $120 365 days
Chula Vista Current $0 $0 $2' S50 S50 S50 $100 385 days
Chula \I15ta Proposed $0 $0 $" $100 $100 $100 $100 3"
Coronado $0 $0 $0 $100 $150 $150 $160 365 days
County of San Diego $0 $0 $50 $100 $150 $200 $200 6 months
Del Mar $0 $0 $0 $00 $00 $00 $60 365 days
ElCajon $0 $0 $7. $75 $75 $75 $75 365 days
Encinitas $0 $0 $25 $50 $100 $160 $150 365 days
Escondida $0 $0 $60 $100 $160 $200 $600 365 days
1llh.14th 15th or mora
Imperial Beach $0 $0 $25 $25 $25 $25 $25 365 days
La Mesa $0 $0 $0 $105 $105 $105 $105 365 days
Lemon Grove (within 30 days) 365 days
51nglePermlt $0 $0 $0 $50 $100 $250 $260
Double Permit $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $50 $100 8ormora=$2lIO
MulliplePennit $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 8"S50,9s$1oo,
10ormoresS250
National City $0 $0 $60 $75 $100 $160 $200 365 days
Oceanside $0 $60 $75 $125 $175 $260 $260 365 days
paway $0 $0 $25 $60 $100 $160 $150 365 days
City of San Diego $75 $150 $300 $1,500 $1,500 $1,500 $1,500 365 days
San Marcos $0 $0 $75 $150 $250 $300 $300 365 days
Santee (witl'lln 30 days) 365 days
SlnglePennlt $( $0 $0 $50 $100 $250 $250
Double Permit $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $50 $100 8 or more = S250
Multiple Permit $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 8:$50,9=<$100,
10 or more; $250
Solana Beach $0 $0 $0 $50 $100 $160 $150 365 days
Vista $0 $0 $100 $200 $500 $500 $500 365 days
(This section blank)
17-5
JULY 10,2007, Item_
Page 6 of9
The graph below gives a visual interpretation of how the City of Chula Vistas alarm penalty
fees compare cOlmty-wide (Graph 1).
Graph 1 City Alarm Fees v. County
AVERAGE FALSE AlARM PENALTIES
SAN DIEGO COUNTY CITIES
$50
$250
$200
$150
~
u.
""
..
c
~
$100
$0
1st
2'"
3rd 4th 5th
Number of False Alarms
~~h~r~l(J:J~urrent
-..- Chula VIsta Pro osed
51h
7ormore
The Police Department employs a Police Data Specialist to coordinate the alarm permit
billings as well as the alarm penalty billings. This position bills residential and
commercial alarm users on a bi-annual basis for the alarm permit fee. This position also
tracks the number of false alarms for each permitted alarm holder and applies the
appropriate alarm penalty when an alarm user has more than two false alarms in a 12
month period. In instances where a resident or commercial user has not obtained the
required alarm permit, the Police Data Specialist sends the appropriate fee information to
the user to obtain compliance. 3 The Police Data Specialist will call repeat offenders to
try and curb or eliminate the number of false alarm calls from the residence or business.
Currently, the Police Department will respond to any alarm calls, whether or not they are
permitted. The total cost for one Police Data Specialist to perform permitting/penalty
processing is $103,438 per year.
TOTAL COST ALARM PROGRAM
Table 4 details the current net impact of the alarm program along with the proposed fee
increases. Although these fee increases do not completely eliminate the net impact to the
3 It is unknown how many un-pennitted alarm users there are currently in the City as the only way to know
if they are un-pennitted is when they have a false alarm and the false alarm address does not match any of
the pennitted addresse5.
17-6
JULY 10,2007, Item_
Page 7 of9
General Fund, there is a 35% decrease in the net impact to the General Fund. If approved,
program revenue will account for 61 % of the program costs.
Table 4 - Current vs. Proposed Net Impact
Pro ram Revenue
Pro ram Cost4
Net 1m act to General Fund
$
$
$
$
$
$
PROPOSED MASTER FEE SCHEDULE CHANGE
Upon adoption of the fee increases, the Master Fee Schedule will read:
CHAPTER VI
Police
A. ALARMS
1. Alarm Use Permit
A nonrefundable fee shall accompany each application for an alarm user
permit as follows:
a. A fee oftweaty fiye fifty dollars ($25.(:)9$50.00) for residential
applications.
b. A (','rent)' five fifty dollar ($25.00$50.00) residential renewal fee
will be required every twenty- four months.
c. In the case of alarm permits for commercial customers, the fees
shall be as follows:
I) A fee of AAy one hundred dollars ($50.00 $100.00)
2) A AAy one hundred dollar ($50.00 $100.00) renewal fee
will be required every twenty-four (24) months.
2. False Alarm Assessment
When any emergency alarms, messages, signals, or notices are received by
the Communications Center which results in a police response and in
4 Includes Officer response costs and alarm pennit/penalty processing costs.
17-7
JULY 10, 2007, Item~
Page 8 of9
which the alarm proves to be a false alarm, the owner and/or occupier of
the property shall pay a false alarm assessment to the City as follows:
a. The first two (2) false alarms within a twelve (12) month period
shall be considered accidental and no fee shall be charged. The
alarm permit applicant shall be notified in writing by the Crime
Prevention Unit after the occurrence of the second false alarm,
notifying himlher that any further false alarms will result in penalty
assessments.
b. For false alarms exceeding the initial two (2) false alarms within a
twelve (12) month period:
1) Third (3rd) false alarm T'.vBHty Five Fiftv Dollars ($25.00
$50.00).
2) Fourth (4'\ Fifth (5th) and Sixth (6th) false alarms-~
One hundred Dollars ($50.00 $100.00).
3) All additional false alarms One Hundred Dollars ($100.00)
each.
The fee for delinquency in payment of a false alarm charge shall be a basic
penalty in an amount equal to ten (10) percent of the false alarm charge, plus one
and one half (1-1/2%) percent per month for non-payment of the charge and basic
penalty.
DECISION MAKER CONFLICT
Staff has reviewed the decision contemplated by this action and has determined that it is
not site specific and consequently the 500 foot rule found in California Code of
Regulations section 18704.2(a)(1) is not applicable to this decision.
FISCAL IMPACT
The adoption of this resolution will increase the alarm based revenue into the Police
Department and will result in a $120,000 increase in revenues. These revenues will
further offset the ongoing cost of responding to unverified alarm calls.
Prepared by: Edward Chew, Administrative Services Manager, Police Department
17-8
RESOLUTION NO. 2007-
RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF
CHULA VISTA AMENDING CHAPTER VI (A) ALARMS OF
THE CITY OF CHULA VISTA MASTER FEE SCHEDULE
WHEREAS, the City ofChula Vista Police Department recently examined false alarm issues
and their impact upon police services; and
WHEREAS, 99 percent of all alarm calls received by the Police Department are false alarms,
and the Police Department received 6,928 false alarms in Fiscal Year 2005-2006; and
WHEREAS, false alarms also have a monetary impact upon the Police Department, and the
Police Department is requesting increases in the alarm permit fees and alarm penalty fees to help
further offset the cost of administering the City's Alarm Program and responding to false alarms.
Proposed Change to the Master Fee Schedule
(alarm permit fees)
USER CURRENT RATE NEW RATE
Residential $25.00 $50.00
Commercial $50.00 $100.00
Proposed Change to the Master Fee Schedule
(alarm penalty fees)
NO. OF FALSE ALARMSl CURRENT RATE NEW RATE
0-2 NO CHARGE NO CHARGE
3 $25.00 $50.00
4-6 $50.00 $100.00
More than 6 $100.00 $100.00
WHEREAS, the increases, if adopted, would result in a net increase of $120,000 to the
Police Department revenues.
NOW THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED, that the City Council of the City of Chula Vista
does hereby amend Chapter VI (A) Alarms of the City ofChula Vista Master Fee Schedule
BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED, that the residential alarm permits fee be increased from $25
to $50.
BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED, that the commercial alarms permits fee be increased from
$50 to $100.
I The number of false alarms subject to penalty is calculated based upon a rolling twelve-month period
commencing from the date of the first false alarm.
17-9
Resolution No. 2007-
Page 2
BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED, that the penalty for the third false alarm in a twelve-month
period be increased from $25 to $50.
BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED, that the penalty for the fourth, fifth and sixth false alarm in a
twelve-month period be increased from $50 to $100 per occurrence.
Presented by
Approved as to form by
~~~
Moore.
City Attorney
Richard P. Emerson
Police Chief
J:\Anomey\RESO\POLICE\Amd Master Fee Schedule Alarms_07~lo..o7.doc
17-10