Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAboutMINUTES - 08111992 - H.7 H.7 THE BOARD OF SUPERVISORS OF CONTRA COSTA COUNTY, CALIFORNIA Adopted this Order on August 11, 1992 by the following vote: AYES: Supervisors Powers, Fanden, Schroder, Torlakson, McPeak NOES: None ABSENT: None ABSTAIN: None SUBJECT: Presentation of the Contra Costa County Labor Coalition Dennis Winkler on behalf of the Contra Costa County Employees Labor Coalition, presented the Coalition' s cost saving proposals and commentary on departmental budgets. i Henry L. Clarke, Contra Costa Employees Association, Local I , and Jim Hicks, AFSCME, spoke on the County' s budget process. It was proposed that the Labor Coalition consider meeting with the Management Council to discuss issues of mutual concern and that should there be interest in a joint meeting to so advise the Chair of the Board. There being no further discussion, IT IS BY THE BOARD ORDERED that receipt of the presentation of the Contra Costa County Labor Coalition is ACKNOWLEDGED- hereby certify that this Is a true and correct copy of an action taken and entered on the minutes of the Board of Supervlsors on the date shown. cc: County Administrator ATTESTED. PHIL BATCHE R,Clerk of the Board of Supervisors and.County Administrator By 5; ..:: ` .Deputy CONTRA COSTA COUNTY EMPLOYEES LABOR COALITION COMMENTARY ON THE BUDGET 1992-93 MESSAGE TO THE BOARD OF SUPERVISORS Public Employees Union, Local One, AFSME, and SEIU Local 535,together representing over 4, 000 County of Contra Costa workers, are unified in our opposition to the proposed budget. Our opposition is not limited to concerns regarding position eliminations. In fact, it is the focus solely on position cuts, and therefore program reductions, which we find most disturbing. We do not dispute the reality of the current economic crisis. As trade unionists we are acutely aware of the national economic depression, its toll is being taken on our members in the private and public sectors across the state and nation. We do, however, take strong exception to the nature of the cuts, the process by which these cuts were made, the abrogation of policy formation by the Board, and the usurpation of this function by the County Administrator, and most department heads. If ever there was a time for creative leadership in local government it is now. If ever there was a time for the promotion of public input into the budgeting process it is today. Instead, the "public" had a one day cattle call of random commentary without benefit of organization by department or budget item. Further, the department head sessions,ostensibly conducted in public, were rearranged for the benefit of the Board without notification to the public. In many enlightened jurisdictions the public hearing is a real opportunity for taxpayers to address community priorities and the allocation of resources. It is recommended that your Board look at the "Values Based Budget" model now in' place in Alameda County as a starting point in addressing basic issues of democratizing the budget process. The Board of Supervisors is an elected body, charged with the duty to shape public policy. It hires a staff, primarily through its Chief Administrative Officer, to conduct the daily business which flows from this policy. It has been the unstated policy of this Board, and many of your colleagues in other jurisdictions, to accept the recommended budget as devoid of policy decisions except at the most macro level. Ln other words, to decide what programs, at what level of service,1to fund. Looking more deeply into the budget, on a line item basis, has been viewed as micro managing. The Labor Coalition believes that there are many policy issues to be decided at the micro level. Particularly, in an economic environment as ominous as today's. Later in my presentation, I will point to some areas of concern which we believe are in need of policy input. Labor has come before you in the past several weeks with proposals regarding the scaling back of management level positions. Although your Board has indicated some willingness to proceed in this direction, very little substantive change has been brought about. For our recomendations previously brought forward, and remarks such as those just made by me, we have been accused of management bashing. This we deny. The majority of the managers within the County have risen from the rank and file, and if they are laid off will return to the ranks. Perhaps, even to leadership within our unions. We do not speak of downsizing management for the sake of having it be "them" or "us". Quite obviously, when a management level position is eliminated, the manager occupying that position retreats into a lower classification. The worker who is displaced by this process, one of our members, is the worker who heads for the unemployment line. Rather, it is our believe that downsizing must begin with those who do not provide direct services. Programs eliminated today are highly unlikely to be restored in the future. If they can be kept at some functional level through the current crisis, it is possible that they may be restored in the future. Speaking of the future, we understand that a restructuring of the workforce on the scale we propose cannot be done in a months time. As a signal of good faith, and sound policy formation, we recommend that your Board resolve to obtain a reputable consultant to evaluate every management classification in the County service. We are sure that such an inventory will disclose numerous positions which do not meet the criteria for classification as management. We also believe that such a study will reveal layers of redundancy in the administration of many programs. One need look no further than the downsizing taking place in the private sector in response to the current economic depression, in order to discover how deeply you can cut into layers of management without affecting the "product. " Before I proceed to the budget items we would like you to examine,I would like to focus your attention on one last area of policy formation. I have heard this Board speak in praise of the County's workforce, and to declare your despair at your inability to influence our state legislature and governor. You have declared your distance from responsibility for the severe cuts which are now forced upon local government, and in large part this is true. You are left to react to, and attempt to mitigate, the impact of decisions which are not your own. However, as to the conduct of the process by which your staff will conduct the laying off of County workers, you are in complete control, at least as to policy and directive. We expect that you will with all due speed and force insure that fairness and justice prevail in the process of paring down the workforce. All three labor unions are currently meeting at the departmental level to negotiate the impact of layoffs. Many departments have risen to the occasion, and are conducting themselves with great compassion. However, many departments are mired in bureaucratic foolishness which is severely impacting our members. Managers may be feeling bashed, but there is hardly a worker in the County who will not be adversely affected by this process, whether or not they become unemployed. Their pain has largely gone unnoticed. We implore this Board to direct its staff to insure that justice and fairness prevail, even if fairness is in contradiction to a set of rules which was written at a time which could not foresee the current crisis. THE BUDGET: BIG TICKET ITEMS Heretofore, the subject of what constitutes prudent reserves has been relegated to the so-called expert advise of Moody's and Standard and Poors. While their advise is not necessarily wrong, neither is it the gospel truth. We have consulted with a number of experts on public finance, as well as the bond department of a major national brokerage. What we have found is that there is no consensus on what constitutes prudent reserves. What we did find was a consensus opinion that reducing the reserve modestly would in all likelihood not have any adverse affect on the County's fiscal health, or its ability to raise capital at favorable rates. Particularly when one factors in the consensus amongst economists that interest rates will remain depressed for the foreseeable future. Currently, the County is carrying reserves which total approximately $10,200, 000. This sum constitutes 4. 3 percent of the General Fund. Reducing this by one half percent to 3 .8 percent of the general fund would raise approximately $1, 200, 000 which could be applied to program restoration. It would be imprudent to ignore exploring this area in a meaningful way. Too much is at stake to ignore this resource. The following items of concern came to our attention while comparing certain line items across department lines. They are not the only areas of concern raised by this examination, but they stood out as large enough to bring to this forum. There is no intent on our part to cast aspersion on the integrity of those who have compiled the budget you have adopted. We see no conspiracy. What we do see are areas of revenue and expenditure which raise questions either as issues of policy formation or because they were incongruous, at least from our perspective. c. COMMENTARY ON THE BUDGET REVENUE: The two items listed below are not dependent on the State budget, nor do they appear to be categories which should be as significantly impacted by the state of the economy as their projected decline suggests 1) FINES, FORFEITURES, PENALTIES ($2,402, 257) (27.2%) 2) MISCELLANEOUS REVENUE ( $656,060) (16.3%) QUESTION: WHY SUCH A SIGNIFICANT DECLINE IN THESE AREAS? EXPENDITURES: The items listed below are the sum of all departments which show expenses under the various categories. Those items listed with a + sign are the amount over last years budget, and the percentage they have increased. ITEM NO. 2150 FOOD $75,820 2200 MEMBERSHIPS 365,566 2284 REQUESTED MAINTENANCE 610,415 SHERIFF DETENTION + 148,000 +135% SOCIAL SERVICES + 64,998 + 37% SUPERIOR COURT + 70,000 PUBLIC HEALTH + 42,580 + 40% 2301 EMPLOYEE MILEAGE 888,766 2303 OTHER EMPLOYEE TRAVEL 1,058,382 2315 DATA PROCESSING 7,746,897 SOCIAL SERVICES 1,949,000 + 34% 2310 PROFESSIONAL\ SPECIAL SERVICES 20,040,862 1014 SHERIFF OVERTIME 2,961,081 SHERIFF 1,198,683 SHERIFF DETENTION 1,751,898 CRIMINALISTICS 10,500 The following five pages comprise an inventory of most departments operating with General Fund monies. The line item expenses struck us as questionable, and in need of further analysis. My remarks on these items, in the interest of time will be limited to the category titled Employee Group Insurance. You will note that the percentage increase varies widely from department to department. The range is from a low of 1.6 percent in the department of the Clerk of the Board, to a high of 31 percent in the Office of the Public Defender. Insurance experience ratings are computed by the carrier for the entire group, not by department. There is also no correlation between percentage increases and the nature of the work performed. VARIANCE PERCENT FROM VARIANCE BUDGET ACCOUNT TITLE ADJUSTED FROM UNIT BUDGET BUDGET CENTRAL SERVICES 1063 EMPLOYEE GROUP INSURANCE $22,525 28.3 2100 OFFICE EXPENSE $9,500 2262 BUILDING OCCUPANCY COSTS $10,193 2270 MAINTENANCE EQUIPMENT $13,695 2310 PROF/SOC SERVICES $44,000 COUNTY CLERK 1013 TEMP SALARIES $7,200 18.9 1060 EMPLOYEE GROUP INSURANCE $49,095 18.6 CORONER 1060 EMPLOYEE GROUP INSURANCE $8,078 24.3 1011 TEMP SALARIES $6,000 60 CAO 1060 EMP GROUP INSURANCE $23,694 10.8 1013 TEMP SALARIES $73,000 2200 MEMBERSHIPS $9,675 406 SUPERIOR COURT 1013 TEMP SALARIES $37,500 16.9 1060 EMP GROUP INSURANCE $64,158 27.1 2300 TRANSPORTATION/TRAVEL $57,000 85.5 2314 CONTRACTED TEMP HELP $10,000 2315 DATA PROCESSING $19,205 227.4 2351 JURY FILES/EXPENSES $200,000 102.6 MUNICIPAL COURT 1760 EMP GROUP INSURANCE $16,511 22.8 2314 CONTRACTED TEMP HELP $28,500 228 VARIANCE PERCENT FROM VARIANCE BUDGET ACCOUNT TITLE ADJUSTED FROM UNIT BUDGET BUDGET -------- -------- -------- -------- --------- -------- -------- DATA PROCESSING - 2102 BOOKS/PERIODICALS/SUBS $62,540 305.7 2110 COMMUNICATIONS $9,500 64 2303 OTHER TRAVEL EXPENSES $6,300 32.2 DISTRICT ATTORNEY 1013 TEMP SALARIES $80,009 68.3 1014 PERMANENT OT $19,224 42.70 1060 EMPLOYEE GROUP INSURANCE $122,338 20.1 ELECTIONS 2131 MINOR EQUIPMENT $25,100 62.8 COMMUNICATIONS 1060 EMP GROUP INSURANCE $29,157 27.9 232 COUNTY VEHICLE $24,000 40.00 2310 PROF/SPEC SVCS $26,500 15.5 2315 DATA PROCESSING $11,554 26.2 FLEET SERVICES 1060 EMP GROUP INSURANCE $31,583 31.5 HEALTH SERVICES 2100 OFFICE EXPENSE $24,326 9.5 2260 RENTS/LEASES PROPERTY $11,766 174.9 2301 AUTO MILEAGE EMP $50,020 29.1 2314 CONTRACTED TEMP HELP $71,782 70.4 2477 EDUCATION SUPPLIES/COURSES $39,380 265.4 2310 PROFESSONAUSPECIAL SERVIC $174,155 9.4 MENTAL HEALTH 1017 PERM PHYSICIAN SALARY $392,140 39.6 2110 COMMUNICATIONS $21,317 39.1 VARIANCE PERCENT FROM VARIANCE BUDGET ACCOUNT TITLE ADJUSTED FROM UNIT BUDGET BUDGET -------- -------- -------- -------- --------- -------- -------- -------- -------- -------- -------- --------- -------- -------- ASSESSOR 1060 EMPLOYEE GROUP INSURANCE $108,368 22.5 AUDITOR 1060 EMPLOYEE INSURANCE $52,081 17.9 2300 OTHER TRAVEL $6,500 86.7 210 PROF/SPEC SVC $11,000 42.3 CENTRAL SERVICES 2100 OFFICE EXPENSE $9,500 26.8 2310 PROF/SPEC SVC $44,000 39.6 CENTRAL CLERK 1013 TEMP SALARIES $7,200 18.9 1060 EMPLOYEE GROUP INS $49,095 18.6 COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT 1060 EMP GROUP INS $39,943 18.3 2302 USE OF COUNTY VEHICLE $8,000 80 2314 TEMP HELP CONTRACT $16,000 20 CORONER 1060 . EMP GROUP INS . $8,078 24.3 2302 USEOF COUNTY VEHICLE $6,000 37.5 2303 OTHER TRAVEL $1,600 55.2 CAO 1944 RETIREMENT EXPENSE $38,863 11.4 1060 EMPLOYEE GROUP INSURANCE $23,694 10.8 2200 MEMBERSHIP $9,675 406 COUNTY COUNSEL 1060 EMPLOYEE GROUP INSURANCE $12,617 12.5 VARIANCE PERCENT FROM VARIANCE BUDGET ACCOUNT TITLE ADJUSTED FROM UNIT BUDGET BUDGET -------- -------- -------- -------- --------- -------- -------- -------- -------- -------- -------- --------- -------- -------- LIBRARY 1060 EMP GROUP INS $151,800 28.1 1013 TEMP SALARIES $75,000 15.8 2100 OFFICE EXPENSES $48,000 22.6 PERSONNEL 2110 COMMUNICATIONS $4,330 46.2 PUBLIC DEFENDER 1060 EMP GROUP INS $86,099 31 2102 BOOKS/PERIODICALS $4,000 33.3 2310 PROF/SPEC SVCS $42,688 85 RECORDER 2110 COMMUNICATIONS $3,404 205.7 2262 BUILDING OCCUPANCY $37,936 29.4 SHERIFF 2170 HOUSHOLD EXP $8,425 71.4 2270 MAINTENANCE EQUIP $92,010 35.4 2300 TRANS/TRAVEL $59,750 374.6 DETENTION 2100 OFFICE EXPENSE $54,000 28.7 2131 MINOR EQUPMENT $43,300 251.7 2170 HOUSHOLD EXP $85,360 14.5 2270 MAINTENANCE EQUPMENT $120,200 105.4 2284 REQUESTED MAINTENANCE $85,100 135.3 VARIANCE PERCENT FROM VARIANCE BUDGET ACCOUNT TITLE ADJUSTED FROM UNIT BUDGET BUDGET -------- -------- -------- -------- --------- -------- -------- -------- -------- -------- -------- --------- -------- -------- GSA BUILDING MAINTENANCE 2260 RENTS AND LEASES $1,374,081 33.6 2262 BUILDING OCCUPANCY $50,429 24.6 2270 EQUIP MAINTENANCE $47,500 58.3 2282 GROUNDS MAINTENANCE $88,900 66.8 2328 ADMIN SVCS $261,244 41.7 2490 MISC SERVICES $6,620 49.5 BUILDING OCCUPANCY 2110 COMMUNICATIONS $18,053 189.5 2328 ADMIN SERVICES $11,384 36.3 FLEET SERVICES 2271 CNTRL CARAGE REPAIRS $405,422 18.1 2315 DATA PROCESSING $11,234 125.4 2302 USE OF COUNTY VEHICLE $24,000 40 2310 PROF/SPEC SVCS $26,500 15.5 DATE PROCESSING $11,554 262 SOCIAL SERVICE DEPARTMENT BUDGET REDUCTION PROPOSALS These are the line item and specific position reductions recommended for the Contra Costa County Social Department. The recommendations dealing with personnel costs include a 27% factor for benefits, etc. , a number felt to be conservative. Recommendation 1: Eliminate all personal services contracts of recently retired administrative staff. $ 48,791 Recommendation 2 : Move Food Stamp overissuances from ORCX back to DBRU. The current. arrangement is not cost effective. (Our recommendation does not provide for additional DBRU personnel costs. ) CUT ORC Contract $ 125, 000 Recommendation 3: Eliminate the AFDC midmonth payment. In addition to the cost savings noted below, the elimination of the midmonth check would have a positive benefit to Field Eligibility Workers' workload. CUT AFDC Midmonth Payment $10,860 x 12 = $ 130, 320 Recommendation 4: Revamp the manual material distribution system. CUT Needless Distribution $1,440 x 12 = $17,280 r Recommendation 5: Eliminate the classification of Assistant County Welfare Director and the concept of the Executive Team. Appoint a Deputy Director, to manage the Department in the absence of the Director, at a salary equivalent to that of an Assistant Director. Create the class of Fiscal Manager at the salary level equivalent to Division Manager. CUT 3 Assistant Directors $5856 x 3 x 12 x 1.27 = $267, 736 ADD 1 Deputy Director $5856 x 1 x 12 x 1.27 = - 89,245 ADD 1 Fiscal Manager $4790 x 1 x 12 x 1. 27 = - 73, 000 $105,491 Recommendation 6: Reduce the number of Division Mangers down to two for Antioch for Muir/Arnold, one for Marina West, one for Research Drive, one for Sobrante Valley, plus one to be responsible for General Assistance for a total of eight. CUT 7 Division Managers $4970 x 7 x 12 x 1.27 = $530,200 Recommendation 7: Eliminate the SS Computer Systems Officer and place the SS Information Systems Analysts under the Fiscal Manager. CUT 1 SS Computer Systems Officer $5061 x 1 x 12 x 1. 27 = $ 77, 130 CUT 1 Department PC Coordinator 68,834 $139,972 Recommendat `can 8: Eliminate Fraud Manager and replace with a Welfare Fraus Supervisor (s.lready budgeted) . Please Early Fraud Detection, DBRU :and AFyieals under the Fiscal Manager. CUT 1 .Welfare Fraud Manager $4790 x 1; ' x 12 x 1 . 27 = $ 73 , 000 Reco i mendatl<)n 9: Eliminate, GAIN. expenditures to Child Care Council for child care payments ;'as 'tecommended by Local 512 and the GAIN Social Work staff The ..bost. savings is estimated by Local 512 . CUT ;GAIN -;honey to Child Care Council $ 121,000 Redo wendation 10: Cease fundin of positions in other departments . CUT 1 As III (Personnel) $5509 xx "12 x 1. 27 = $ 83 ,951 Recom endat .on 11: Eliminate the two Volunteer Program Coordinators and transfer their dut e4 to' subordinates. GUT Vo' l ?steer Program Coordinators 4:3754 x 2; x 12 x 1.27 = $ 114, 421 Recoinmendation 12: Eliminate or reduce funding to outside contracts . CUT . Food :`Coalition by 50% (20-070 ) '$3.18 , 000/2 $ 59 , 000 ; CUT Childrens Council (20-387) 65,910 CUT._Child Abuse Prevention Council ( 20- 512) 66, 576 CUT CCARQ Disabled Adults ( 20-004 ) 9, 550 CUT :MayfLowers Transfer 9, 000 $ 210, 036 Recdhiri endation 13: We a're conc :rned that the Department' s fiscal/systems managers .have; :been esmpt from previous position reductions and recommend that; this segment be cut by 30%. The following rec":dmmendations deal specifically with Social Service budget line item,. Wedo not believe there is any overlap with the above. recommendaY:ions. 0500,-1013 tf,,imporary salaries Temporariesshould not be used when permanent staff are being laid 'off . ie recommendation elimination of the entire item. 4 $396 ,490x 100% $ 396 , 490 0500-2100 o.f:fice supplies The :;Departm%nt must make a greater effort to reduce this cost. We uggest <3. 20% cut from their recommendation. 4 $1:'610, 001 x 20% $ 322,000 0.500--2262 bldg occupancy costs Th.is,; number ,,should be reduced with the closure of three Social 8ery ce_ Department Offices. We project a minimum 10% savings. $5,.748, 40.3 x 10% = _ ----_--_ $ 574, 842 0500,;2300 tf insportation & travel. We are t.ol.dthis includes expenses for AAA and RSVP, two programs slated for reduction. This item can be reduced by a minimum of 20° o := $851`000 , 10% -___- $ 8,500 0500=-2303 t. er travel .We' recommend. a cut of 40% in this tight time. X91,`333 40$ $ 36, 533 A 0500-231,4; c 0tracted temporary help The Depar,tmont Should not be contracting our for temporaries when la ' g ,:off ��i�rmanent y;rn staff. We recommend elimination of the en:,, e item; $79',:000 R 100% $ 73, 000 .GRAND 'OTA I:y $ 3,116,826 In closing, I would like to address the decisions you will likely face when the other shoe drops in Sacramento. It appears a forgone conclusion that Special District Augmentation Funds will be severely cut if not eliminated. Your Board will be heavily lobbied to fund the fire districts with general fund monies. The temptation will be great to succumb to those demands. It is no secret that property owners vote in far greater numbers than do children, the mentally ill, those without medical insurance, and the poor or homeless. It has been the first group, those more advantaged, who have responded favorably at the polls to the obscene cry of the right wing "NO NEW TAXES". It is past time for the senders of that message to be educated as to the consequences arising from their bleat. Citizenship in this great democracy demands mutual responsibility for all members of society. Freedom will surely collapse if our culture declines much further into the "me first, I got mine syndrome" which has shaped the past decade. If there is to be pain, let it be born by all. Better still, those more able to absorb the pain should get the largest share. BOARD OF SUPERVISORS FROM: Diane Iwasa, Director Contra Animal Services Department Costa DATE: August 11, .1992 C J "1 SUBJEC'r: Animal Services Fee Increase SPECIFIC REQUEST(S) OR RECOMMENDATION S) & BACKGROUND AND JUSTIFICATION RESOLUTION NO. 92/562 The Board of Supervisors having adopted Resolution 92/111 which provides , for fees for Animal Services; and The Animal Services Director having recommended that certain Animal Services fees be increased or added; IT IS BY THE CONTRA COSTA COUNTY BOARD OF SUPERVISORS RESOLVED that the recommendation of the Animal Services Director is approved, and that Resolution 92/111 is rescinded effective September 1, 1992, and that the fees shown below are effective September 1, 1992. Individual Dog and Cat Licenses Licensing of individual cats is voluntary. The fee for licensing a dog or cat .is $21.00. The fee for licensing a neutered dog or cat -as evidenced by a veteri- narian is $7.00. A late fee of $15.00 shall be charged: (a) for failure. to license an animal within 30 days after a license is required, or (b) if a renewal fee is unpaid within 30 days after it is due and payable. The fee to individually license a dog or cat for two years is $37.00. The fee to individually license for two years a neutered dog or cat as evidenced by a veterinarian is $13.00. The fee to individually license a dog or cat for three years is $53.00. The fee to individually license for three years a neutered dog or cat . as evidenced by a veterinarian is $19.00. CONTINUED ON ATTACHMENT: YES SIGNATURE: RECOMMENDATION OF COUNTY ADMINISTRATOR RECOMMENDA(((TION OF BOARD COMMITTEE APPROVE .OTHER SIGNATURE S : ACTION OF BOARD ON Mgusf 11, 1992 APPROVED AS REC(7)MMENDED X OTHER VOTE OF SUPERVISORS 1 HEREBY CERTIFY THAT THIS 1S A TRUE X UNANIMOUS (ABSENT - AND CORRECT COPY OF AN ACTION TAKEN AYES: NOES:_ AND ENTERED ON THE MINUTES OF THE BOARD ABSENT; ABSTAIN: OF SUPERVISORS ON THE DATE SHOWN. CC: ATTESTED August 11, 1992 PHIL BATCHELOR, CLERK OF THE BOARD OF SUPERVISORS AND COUNTY ADMINISTRATOR • M382/7-83 BY —,DEPUTY RESOLUTION NO. 92/562 License Fee Refunds and Credits License fees once paid are nonrefundable. (a) If, within 120 days, the owner of an animal who has purchased a one-year license and whose animal is under one year of age submits proof from a licensed veterinarian that the animal has been spayed or neutered, a credit equal to the one-year license fee for a spayed or neutered animal will be applied to the next animal license purchased by the owner. If an animal dies or is moved out of the county, any unused licensing credits will be refunded to the owner on written request if the request is received within the effective time period of the license. Multiple Pet Licenses The application fee for a multiple pet license is $40.00. Multiple pet license application fees are due and payable upon applica- tion for a multiple pet license. The fee for a multiple pet license for ten animals or fewer is $10.00. The fee for a multiple pet license for eleven to twenty animals is $20.00. Multiple pet license fees are due and payable upon issuance of the license. Renewal fees become due and payable one year after a multiple pet license is issued. Late fees of $20.00 for licenses for ten animals or fewer and $40.00 for licenses for eleven to twenty animals shall be charged: (a) for failure to obtain a multiple pet license within 60 days after a multiple pet license is required, or (b) if a renewal fee is unpaid within 60 days after it is due and payable. The fees for multiple pet licenses are payable in addition to the spe- cial license fees for individual dogs or cats, obtained under the multiple pet license. The fee to individually license a dog or cat under a multiple pet license is $21.00. The fee to individually license a neutered dog or cat, as evidenced by a veterinarian, under a multiple pet license is $7.00. Kennel Licenses (Community Development) Applications shall be made to the Community Development Director. Adoption Fees The fee to adopt a dog is $10.00, plus a deposit for a spay or neuter, rabies vaccination and license. The fee to adopt a cat is $5.00, plus a deposit for a spay or neuter, rabies vaccination and license. The fee to adopt all other animals will be based on a sealed bid process with a minimum approved by the Animal Services Director. Impoundment Fees The Animal Services Director shall collect the following redemption fees for impounded animals: The basic impoundment fee for a dog is $35.00. -2- RESOLUTION NO. 92/562 The basic impoundment fee for one or more cows, bulls, steers, burros, horses, sheep, lambs, goats, hogs, or other large animals is the actual cost of impounding, but at least $50.00. The basic impoundment fee for a cat, rabbit, bird, fowl, or other small animal not otherwise provided for is $25.00. In addition to the basic impoundment fee, the following shall be charged per day as part of the impoundment fee for feeding and caring for the impounded animals: Dogs $10.00 Cats $10.00 Cows, bulls, steers, burros, horses, sheep, lambs, goats, hogs and other large animals $14.00 Other small animals $ 6.00 Owners will be responsible for the actual cost of veterinary care ren- dered to impounded animals. In the case of an animal reclaimed for a second time within a twelve- month period, an additional fee of $35.00 shall be charged; and in the case of an animal reclaimed three or more times within a twenty-four month period, an additional fee of $65.00 shall be charged each time. The administrative fee for quarantining an animal at home if deemed appropriate by the Animal Services Director is $45.00, or The fee to quarantine an animal at the Animal Services Center shall be the same for the impound and per-day fee. Penalties may be included if the animal was at large. Surrender Fees for Owned Animals The fee to surrender: a licensed dog or cat is $10.00. an unlicensed dog or cat or miscellaneous animal under 100 lbs. is $25.00 a miscellaneous small animal under 20 lbs, is $20.00. A miscellaneous large animal over 100 lbs, is $150.00. There is no fee for an unweaned litter surrendered with an adult. Litters will be charged as one animal if surrendered at the same time. Dead Animal Disposal Fees There is no fee for disposal of a licensed dead animal at the Center. The fee for disposal of an unlicensed dead dog, cat or miscellaneous animal under 100 lbs. , at the Center is $10.00. The fee for disposal of a small miscellaneous animal under 20 lbs, at the Center is $8.00. The fee for disposal of a miscellaneous dead animal over 100 lbs, at the Center is $135.00. Pick-up Fees for Owned Animals Fees for all owned dogs, cats, and miscellaneous animals under 100 lbs. , dead or alive, picked up in the field or at the owner's home will be $15.00 in addition to other fees for service as specified. The fee to pick up animals over 100 lbs, is the actual cost of pickup, surrender or disposal . -3- RESOLUTION NO. 92/562 Dead Animals from Veterinary Hospitals The fee to pick up and dispose of dead animals from veterinary hospitals is $15.00 for the first animal and $5.00 for each additional animal in the same pick-up. The limit per pick-up will be six (6) animals. The fee to pick up animals over 100 lbs, is the actual cost with a minimum of $50.00. Trap Deposit The deposit to rent a cat trap is $36.00. The deposit to rent a dog trap is $120.00 (with Animal Services Supervisor approval only). Trap Rental Fees The rental fee for cat traps shall be $4.00 per day. The rental fee for dog traps shall be $12.00 per day. Servicing Traps The fee to service a trap in the field is $15.00. Dangerous Animal Fees The application fee for a dangerous animal permit is $100.00, due and payable upon application for permit. The fee for a dangerous animal permit is $200.00. An additional delinquent fee of $50.00 shall be charged if a dangerous animal permit renewal fee is not paid before February 1. The fees for dangerous animal permits are payable in addition to the license fees for individual animals. Administrative Fees The administrative fee for replacement of a .lost tag is $5.00. The fee to photocopy department records shall be determined by the actual cost of duplication. If a citation or warning is issued for a licensing violation, it may be cleared before referral to the courts by paying an administrative fee of $25.00. Governmental Fees Deer Calls - the fee to respond to an injured or trapped deer is $50.00 billable to the State Department of Fish and Game. Raccoon/Miscellaneous Calls - The fee to respond to an injured or trapped raccoon or miscellaneous wild animal is $40.00 billable to the State Department of Fish and Game. Emergency/Disaster Responses - The fee to assist another governmental jurisdiction in times of emergency to handle animal-related problems that are reimbursable to the jurisdiction requesting assistance will be the actual cost of providing the service. Miscellaneous Fees Cat carrying containers $ 4.00 Flea powder 5.00 Flea spray 7.00 Flea fogger (12 oz. ) 10.00 Medicated Shampoo 6.00 Flea Shampoo 6.00 Prescription medication Fee based on cost Dispensing leashes 1.00 -4- RESOLUTION NO. 92/562 Spay/Neuter Clinic Fees Ovario-Hysterectomy (Spay)* Dogs over 80 lbs. $60.00 Dogs 50-80 lbs. 40.00 Dogs under 50 lbs. 35.00 Cats 30.00 Castration (Neuter)* Dogs over 80 lbs. $35.00 Dogs 50-80 lbs. 25.00 Dogs under 50 lbs. 20.00 Cats 15.00 Vaccinations F.V.R.C.P. - 3 in 1 Comb. (cat) $ 9.00 Rabies (dog) 4.00 Rabies (cat) 5.00 D.H.L.P.P. - 5 in 1 Comb, (dog) 9.00 Feline Leukemia 12.00 Corona (dog) 5.00 Bordatella (dog) 5.00 Parvo (dog) 5.00 *Out-of-County Residents will be charged an additional $14.00. A $10.00 additional fee will be charged for failure to give 24-hour notice if unable to keep surgery appointment. A fee of $10.00 for dogs and cats per day or portion of a day will be charged for animals not claimed on time. Original to Department of Animal Services cc: County Administrator County Auditor-Controller County Clerk County Counsel -5- RESOLUTION NO. 92/562 1992--1993 ANIMAL SERVICES FEE ADJUSTMENT DESCRIPTION FEE PROPOSED FEE ANNUAL OLD NEW DIFFERENCE FEE DIFFERENCE ESTIMATE REVENUE REVENUE Board Cat $8 $10 $2 988 $7,904 $9,880 $1,976 Board Other $12 $14 $2 100 $1,400 $1,400 Surr. Lic. Live Cat $5 $10 $5 4 $20 $40 $20 Surr. Unlic. Live Cat $20 $25 $5 1116 $22,320 $27,900 $5,580 Surr. Misc.>100# $120 $150 $30 4 $480 $600 $120 Disp Unlic. Dead Cat $8 $10 $2 204 $1,632 $2,040 $408 Disp. Misc. >100# $120 $135 $15 4 $480 $540 $60 Dog Trap Rental $0 $12 $12 30 $0 $360 $360 Service Traps $0 $15 $25 100 $0 $1500 $1,500 Respond to Deer Calls for State Agency $0 $100 $100 70 $0 $7,000 $7,000 Respond to Racoon Calls For State Agency $0 $25 $25 50 $0 $1,250 $1,250 Out of County Spay/Neuter Charge $7 $14 $7 100 $700 $1,400 $700 Emergency Assistance to Other Agency $0 Actual Cost Unknown Total $33,536 $53,910 $17,000 RESOLUTION NO. 92/562