Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAboutMINUTES - 12091986 - 2.8 THE BOARD OF SUPERVISORS OF CONTRA COSTA COUNTY, CALIFORNIA Adopted this Order on December 9 , 1986 , by the following vote: AYES: Supervisors Fanden, Schroder, McPeak, Torlakson, Powers NOES: None ABSENT: None ABSTAIN: None -------------------------------------------------------------------- -------------------------------------------------------------------- SUBJECT: Financing Police Services in the Unincorporated Area of the County Board members considered the report of the County Administrator dated December 4, 1986 , on financing police services in the unincorporated areas of the County. A copy of the report is attached and included as a part of this document. The following persons spoke: Ghillermo "Bill" Moniz, 32 Carroll Drive, Pittsburg, spoke in favor of having a special tax to finance more patrols as a means to reduce crime. Edward Spencer, representing Bill Philbert, Chair of the West Pittsburg Alliance, 3105 Willow Pass Road, West Pittsburg, com- mented on the need for better police service in the West Pittsburg area and expressed support for any vehicle to accomplish this. He advised of complaints his agency has received relative to response time of law enforcement officers called to the scene of a crime. He called attention to fact that the Alliance has agreed to provide a police substation in the Ambrose Community Center. Christy Schneeder, Director of Oakley Residents for Responsible Growth Association, 1993 Chardonnay Drive, Oakley, advised of the need for additional police service in the Oakley area. She noted that 95 percent of the members of her Association voted to support a special tax district to fund a higher level of police services. She commented on the need for additional manpower to staff patrols particularly in the East County area. Ms. Schneeder expressed concern that staffing needs for the new West County Justice Center might negatively impact on the current level of police service in the unincorporated areas. Vickie J. Glover, 37 Sharon Drive, West Pittsburg, expressed the belief that the special tax to fund additional police service should be available to everybody and not limited to new development. She commented on the incidence of vandalism and the need for security personnel in apartment complexes. Paul Kaatz , Contra Costa Employees Association, Local I , proposed withholding action on this matter pending review by the Advisory Committee on Funding of County Services. Mr. Kaatz expressed support for a moratorium on special tax elections pending review of the total funding needs for services countywide. He spoke of the need for a uniform service delivery system countywide. Supervisor Fanden expressed concern that home buyers in new developments would be paying a higher tax than a homeowner in an established subdivision for the same level of police service. She expressed support for a special election to allow residents in a particular area to decide this issue as opposed to imposing a tax on new developments. Supervisor McPeak advised that she, too, has concerns for charging new developments a higher tax to fund police services for an area. She noted that several areas in County Service Area P2 have held elections to impose a tax for a higher level of police service. She expressed the need for equity in providing services to all residents in a particular area. Chairman Powers noted that there did not appear to be a consensus among the Board members as to the methodology to apply to this issue. He also noted that there is some confusion on the part of the public as to what this special tax would do, how much addi- tional service it would provide, and what the impacts would be. He expressed support for a study of an entire area. Supervisor Powers advised that he would support a special tax election for police services if this is what residents in an area desire. Supervisor Schroder suggested deferral of action on this matter pending the establishment of a task force to review this issue and recommend how these services are to be funded. Supervisor Torlakson commented on the rapid growth rate in East County and the impact this has on existing services. He advised that he believes there is a willingness on the part of the community to tax itself. Supervisor Torlakson expressed concern that with every subdivision approved there is a corresponding nega- tive impact on the level of services currently provided. There being no further discussion, IT IS BY THE BOARD ORDERED that decision on this matter is DEFERRED to December 16 , 1986 . 1 hereby certify that this Is a true and correct copy of an action taken and entered on the minutes of the cc: County Administrator Board of Supervisorc on the date shown. Sheriff—Coroner ATTESTEM �����'` � g 11fY J.B. OL.SSON, C€ UV'4'"y CLEM and ex oft3clo Cierk of the Board Py Deputy I TO:._ BOARD OF SUPERVISORS Phil Batchelor, County Administrator FROM: Contra December 4, 1986 Costa DATE: Count Financing Police Service in the Unincorporated Area � SUBJECT; SPECIFIC REQUEST(S) OR RECOMMENDATION(S) & BACKGROUND AND JUSTIFICATION BACKGROUND On September 22, 1986 , you considered a report from the Finance Committee regarding how to finance police service in the unincorporated area, particularly in Oakley, Bethel Island and West Pittsburg. You directed the Sheriff ' s Office, Community Development Department, County Counsel and me to do the following: 1. Define appropriate "subzones" for County Service Area P-6 ,- 2 . -6 ;2 . Define a proposed "base level" of police service in the unincorporated area; and 3 . Study the feasibility of contracting out police services with cities for certain unincorporated areas. Since that time considerable research and discussion has taken place leading to the following recommendations to consider creation of "Special Tax Area" ( STA) to finance additional police service in the unincorporated area. Special Tax Areas A "Special Tax Area" (STA) , pursuant to Government Code 53978 ( a) , can be created by an Ordinance adopted by the Board of Supervisors and can encompass any unincorporated territory including a new subdivision. Although such STA' s could be utilized in any unincorporated area, it seems particularly well suited to providing additional police services in the Oakley, Bethel Island, Byron or West Pittsburg areas. The intent would be to establish STA' s coterminous with new subdivisions and require a special tax approval in the STA as a condition of a new subdivision. Because the vote would be by the developer prior to buildout, the developer could insure that the condition is fulfilled. CONTINUED ON ATTACHMENT; YES SIGNATURE; RECOMMENDATION OF COUNTY ADMINISTRATOR RECOMMENDATION OF BOARD COMMITTEE APPROVE OTHER -2- The estimated parcel tax in an STA would be $125-$150 per year. The proceeds of the tax would be "earmarked" for police service in the STA, and adjacent areas would receive an "incidental" benefit. Until an additional patrol deputy can be funded out of STA proceeds, the proceeds would be used for services within the "beat area" to benefit the STA subdivisions there. Such services as crime prevention and advice on site improvements would be provided to STA subdivisions. With additional patrol strength, the size of the patrol "beats" could decrease, thus improving response time. If an STA area annexed to a city or if there were an incorporation, the STA would dissolve by operation of law. Definition of Base Level of Service Defining a "base level" of service for police service in the unincorporated area is much more difficult than in dense urban areas. Sheriff ' s patrol "beats" are usually large; diverse; and cover varying service needs compared to city police "beats" which are smaller, and more densely populated. Establishing "base level" in the unincorporated area would reduce the flexibility of the Board of Supervisors in financing other essential public services since the county could be held to the standards of the base level regardless of change in the County' s financial condition. Contracting with Cities Our study effort leads to the belief that this concept is neither feasible nor desirable for several reasons: 1. Most large unincorporated areas adjacent to cities can be expected to be annexed in the future. Police service would thus be provided by the city without contract. 2. Cities in Contra Costa County have shown little interest in providing service beyond their own boundaries even to a contiguous city. 3 . This arrangement would not be cost effective because the County would continue paying the cost for the existing beat deputies and the contracted service unless a large unincorporated area or several small areas were totally removed from the beat.