Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAboutBOARD STANDING COMMITTEES - 09272021 - PPC Agenda PktPUBLIC PROTECTION COMMITTEE September 27, 2021 10:30 A.M. Virtual Meeting Join from PC, Mac, Linux, iOS or Android: https://cccounty-us.zoom.us/j/89905606445 Or by Telephone: 214-765-0478 or 888-278-0254 Conference code: 507994 Meeting ID: 899 0560 6445 Supervisor Candace Andersen, Chair Supervisor Federal D. Glover, Vice Chair Agenda Items: Items may be taken out of order based on the business of the day and preference of the Committee 1.Introductions 2.Public comment on any item under the jurisdiction of the Committee and not on this agenda (speakers may be limited to three minutes). 3.APPROVE Record of Action from the July 26, 2021 meeting. (Page 4) 4.RECEIVE an update on the Community Warning System (CWS) from the Sheriff's Office. (Heather Tiernan, CWS Manager) (Page 7) 5.ACCEPT a proposal from the Animal Services Department on contracted city services, including a revised fee structure, and PROVIDE direction to staff. (Beth Ward, Animal Services Director, and Paul Reyes, Senior Deputy County Administrator) (Page 10) 6.The next meeting is currently scheduled for October 25, 2021. 7.Adjourn The Public Protection Committee will provide reasonable accommodations for persons with disabilities planning to attend Public Protection Committee meetings. Contact the staff person listed below at least 72 hours before the meeting. Any disclosable public records related to an open session item on a regular meeting agenda and distributed by the County to a majority of members of the Public Protection Committee less than 96 hours prior to that meeting are available for public inspection at 1025 Escobar St.,4th Floor, Martinez, during normal business hours. Public comment may be submitted via electronic mail on agenda items at least one full work day prior to the published meeting time. For Additional Information Contact: Paul Reyes, Committee Staff Phone (925) 655-2049, Fax (925) 655-2066 paul.reyes@cao.cccounty.us Glossary of Acronyms, Abbreviations, and other Terms (in alphabetical order): Contra Costa County has a policy of making limited use of acronyms, abbreviations, and industry-specific language in its Board of Supervisors meetings and written materials. Following is a list of commonly used language that may appear in oral presentations and written materials associated with Board meetings: AB Assembly Bill ABAG Association of Bay Area Governments ACA Assembly Constitutional Amendment ADA Americans with Disabilities Act of 1990 AFSCME American Federation of State County and Municipal Employees AICP American Institute of Certified Planners AIDS Acquired Immunodeficiency Syndrome ALUC Airport Land Use Commission AOD Alcohol and Other Drugs ARRA American Recovery and Reinvestment Act BAAQMD Bay Area Air Quality Management District BART Bay Area Rapid Transit District BCDC Bay Conservation & Development Commission BGO Better Government Ordinance BOS Board of Supervisors CALTRANS California Department of Transportation CalWIN California Works Information Network CalWORKS California Work Opportunity and Responsibility to Kids CAER Community Awareness Emergency Response CAO County Administrative Officer or Office CCHP Contra Costa Health Plan CCTA Contra Costa Transportation Authority CCP Community Corrections Partnership CDBG Community Development Block Grant CEQA California Environmental Quality Act CIO Chief Information Officer COLA Cost of living adjustment ConFire Contra Costa Consolidated Fire District CPA Certified Public Accountant CPI Consumer Price Index CSA County Service Area CSAC California State Association of Counties CTC California Transportation Commission dba doing business as EBMUD East Bay Municipal Utility District EIR Environmental Impact Report EIS Environmental Impact Statement EMCC Emergency Medical Care Committee EMS Emergency Medical Services EPSDT State Early Periodic Screening, Diagnosis and treatment Program (Mental Health) et al. et ali (and others) FAA Federal Aviation Administration FEMA Federal Emergency Management Agency F&HS Family and Human Services Committee First 5 First Five Children and Families Commission (Proposition 10) FTE Full Time Equivalent FY Fiscal Year GHAD Geologic Hazard Abatement District GIS Geographic Information System HCD (State Dept of) Housing & Community Development HHS Department of Health and Human Services HIPAA Health Insurance Portability and Accountability Act HIV Human Immunodeficiency Syndrome HOV High Occupancy Vehicle HR Human Resources HUD United States Department of Housing and Urban Development Inc. Incorporated IOC Internal Operations Committee ISO Industrial Safety Ordinance JPA Joint (exercise of) Powers Authority or Agreement Lamorinda Lafayette-Moraga-Orinda Area LAFCo Local Agency Formation Commission LLC Limited Liability Company LLP Limited Liability Partnership Local 1 Public Employees Union Local 1 LVN Licensed Vocational Nurse MAC Municipal Advisory Council MBE Minority Business Enterprise M.D. Medical Doctor M.F.T. Marriage and Family Therapist MIS Management Information System MOE Maintenance of Effort MOU Memorandum of Understanding MTC Metropolitan Transportation Commission NACo National Association of Counties OB-GYN Obstetrics and Gynecology O.D. Doctor of Optometry OES-EOC Office of Emergency Services-Emergency Operations Center ORJ Office of Reentry & Justice OSHA Occupational Safety and Health Administration Psy.D. Doctor of Psychology RDA Redevelopment Agency RJOB Racial Justice Oversight Body RJTF Racial Justice Task Force RFI Request For Information RFP Request For Proposal RFQ Request For Qualifications RN Registered Nurse SB Senate Bill SBE Small Business Enterprise SWAT Southwest Area Transportation Committee TRANSPAC Transportation Partnership & Cooperation (Central) TRANSPLAN Transportation Planning Committee (East County) TRE or TTE Trustee TWIC Transportation, Water and Infrastructure Committee UCC Urban Counties Caucus VA Department of Veterans Affairs vs. versus (against) WAN Wide Area Network WBE Women Business Enterprise WCCTAC West Contra Costa Transportation Advisory Committee ____________________________________________________________________________________________________ PUBLIC PROTECTION COMMITTEE 3. Meeting Date:09/27/2021 Subject:RECORD OF ACTION - July 26, 2021 Department:County Administrator Referral No.: N/A Referral Name: RECORD OF ACTION - July 26, 2021  Presenter: Paul Reyes, Committee Staff Contact: Paul Reyes, (925) 655-2049 Referral History: County Ordinance requires that each County body keep a record of its meetings. Though the record need not be verbatim, it must accurately reflect the agenda and the decisions made in the meeting. Referral Update: Attached for the Committee's consideration is the Record of Action for the Committee's July 26, 2021 meeting. Recommendation(s)/Next Step(s): APPROVE Record of Action from the July 26, 2021 meeting. Fiscal Impact (if any): No fiscal impact. This item is informational only. Attachments Record of Action - July 26, 2021 Page 4 of 32 PUBLIC PROTECTION COMMITTEE RECORD OF ACTION FOR July 26, 2021 Supervisor Candace Andersen, Chair Supervisor Federal D. Glover, Vice Chair Present: Candace Andersen, Chair    Federal D. Glover, Vice Chair    1.Introductions Convene - 10:30 am 2.Public comment on any item under the jurisdiction of the Committee and not on this agenda (speakers may be limited to three minutes). No public comment. 3.APPROVE Record of Action from the May 24, 2021 meeting. Approved as presented. AYE: Chair Candace Andersen  Vice Chair Federal D. Glover  4.1. CONSIDER interviewing applicants for a seat on the Juvenile Justice Coordinating Council reserved for two At-Large Youth Seats 2. RECOMMEND candidates for the vacant seats identified above to the Board of Supervisors for appointment consideration at their August 10, 2021 meeting. 3. PROVIDE any additional direction to staff regarding the Juvenile Justice Coordinating Council. The Committee recommended the nomination of Carlos Fernendez and Sydney Mendez to the full Board of Supervisors for appointment to the Juvenile Justice Coordinating Council at-large youth seats. AYE: Chair Candace Andersen  Page 5 of 32 Vice Chair Federal D. Glover  5.RECEIVE an update on the Community Warning System from the Office of the Sheriff. This item has been postponed to the following meeting. 6.RECEIVE an update on emegency management coordination and response. Rick Kovar, Emergency Manager-Sheriff's Office, presented an update on emergency disaster response and the Emergency Operations Center. No action taken as this was an informational item only. 7.1. ACCEPT an update on juvenile justice fees, and 2. TERMINATE referral on juvenile fees charged by the Probation Department. Approved as presented, including termination of referral. AYE: Chair Candace Andersen  Vice Chair Federal D. Glover  8.The next meeting is currently scheduled for August 23, 2021 at 10:30 am. 9.Adjourn Adjourned - 11:13 am For Additional Information Contact:  Paul Reyes, Committee Staff Phone (925) 335-1096, Fax (925) 646-1353 paul.reyes@cao.cccounty.us Page 6 of 32 PUBLIC PROTECTION COMMITTEE 4. Meeting Date:09/27/2021   Subject:Community Warning System/Multi-Language Capability of the Telephone Emergency Notification System Department:County Administrator Referral No.: N/A   Referral Name: Community Warning System/Multi-Language Capability of the Telephone Emergency Notification System  Presenter: Heather Tiernan, CWS Manager, and Rick Kovar, Emergency Manager Contact: Paul Reyes, 925-655-2049 Referral History: This matter was referred to the Internal Operations Committee (IOC) in 2000 and was reassigned to the Public Protection Committee (PPC) in January 2008. The PPC met with Sheriff’s Office staff and Health Services Department staff in March 2008 to receive an update on the County’s efforts to implement multilingual emergency telephone messaging. At the November 2015 and May 2016 meetings, the Sheriff's Office provided updates related to Spanish speaking radio stations and targeted outreach in spanish speaking areas.  Referral Update: Over the past 5 years, the Community Warning System has expanded its technical capabilities and engagement activities to reach more county residents during emergencies. These efforts include: Expanded capabilities of the Wireless Emergency Alert (WEA) system has allowed for increased use, providing emergency alerts to residents, without requiring registration with CWS. In March of 2020, the CWS sent a countywide WEA alert for the first time – alerting residents throughout the county of the upcoming Stay at Home order due to COVID-19. Due to the extended time available to prepare this alert, the message was sent in both English and Spanish. Development of an agreement with the National Weather Service to activate certain emergency alerts on weather radios throughout the county during emergencies that cause communication system failures. Outreach and engagement efforts that have significantly increased registrations to receive emergency alerts directly from the Community Warning System throughout the county – approximately 35% of all county residents are registered with the CWS. The CWS has participated in an average of 60-70 presentations to schools, senior centers, community centers, etc. and 20 large scale outreach events per year between 2017 and 2019. Outreach Page 7 of 32 was significantly slowed due to COVID but is our major focus for the 2nd half of 2021. Development of a Local Partner Outreach Program that engages local communities to engage with the CWS. This helps the CWS leverage existing relationships with community groups to increase registrations and understanding of public alert and warning best practices. This plan includes considerations for both non-English speaking and D/AFN outreach efforts and we have seen great success in jurisdictions that have participated. Multiple exercises that include live alerts to the public. These exercises increase awareness and engagement among residents and tests the system in communities during non-emergency situations. These tests have provided residents a glimpse of what to expect from real life emergency alerts. The Community Warning System has issued emergency alerts for an increasing number of major emergencies over the past several years. On average, the CWS sends emergency alerts for approximately 20 emergency incidents every year. In the past, a majority of alerts were to alert residents of missing people or to avoid the area of a minor emergency, with an occasional shelter in place or evacuation. Since 2017, the number of evacuations and shelter in place/lockdown messages has increased exponentially. Major emergencies that included CWS activations in recent years include: 2017 – Morgan Territory Road Washout – Avoid the Area 2018 – Sims Recycling Fire – Shelter in Place 2018 – Concord Apartment Fire – Evacuation 2018 – Limeridge Fire in Concord – Evacuation 2018 – Marsh Creek Fire – Evacuation 2018 – Bay Point Pipeline Fire – Evacuation 2019 – NuStar Tank Explosion – Shelter in Place 2019 – October PSPS – Multiple evacuation orders and public health advisories due to smoke 2020 – COVID 19 – Issuance of the first Countywide emergency alert 2020 – Oakley Fire – Evacuation  2020 – SCU Fire in Clayton - Evacuation 2020 – Tanker fire on Hwy 80 in Pinole – Shelter in Place and Evacuation orders Immediate translation of emergency alerts remains a significant gap within the field of public alert and warning. No reliable, automatic emergency translation capability has been developed and there are no indications that this issue will be resolved soon. Despite these ongoing challenges, the CWS has taken several steps to address this issue at a local level. Examples include: Emergency alerts are available in Spanish for major incidents at hazardous materials facilities with CWS Terminals for residents who register to receive alerts in Spanish. The CWS website has a Google Translate feature that residents can use to translate website content, including emergency alerts, into a variety of languages.  The CWS has a full time Senior Emergency Planner who is fluent in Spanish and available to discuss the system with other Spanish speakers at outreach events, presentations, over the phone, etc. All outreach material including flyers, brochures, and other media is provided in English and Spanish to all of our partners. Partnership with the Contra Costa Crisis Center (211) to provide alert information in Spanish to residents who contact their organization looking for information. Partnership with the Listos organization throughout Contra Costa County to provide Page 8 of 32 outreach information in multiple languages to community residents. The Community Warning System also focuses outreach and engagement efforts with residents with disabilities and access and functional needs. Efforts made to engage and provide useful information with the D/AFN community include: Addition of the UserWay feature on the CWS website to increase accessibility by adjusting the website in a variety of ways including increased font size, text and line spacing, contrast adjustments, etc. Ability to send emergency alerts via a variety of tools including both audio and visual messages. Participation on the Disability/Access and Functional Needs Steering Committee, various subcommittees and planning committees and at the county’s annual Disabilities/Access and Functional Needs Forum for the public to learn about accessible services available to them. Development of low literacy pocket guides for evacuations, shelter-in-place, and emergency alerts. Moving forward: The CWS will continue to expand the Local Partner Outreach Program throughout the County with a focus on non-English speaking residents, D/AFN community members, and culturally diverse communities. While this program has been very successful, its rollout has been hindered by limited staff and COVID-19. With the opening of the state and the anticipated hiring of another Emergency Planning Coordinator by the end of 2021, we expect this program to become more widespread throughout 2022. In 2020, the CWS began consistently using the Nextdoor platform to increase awareness and encourage registration for emergency alerts. As a county entity, our reach on this platform is close to 300,000 residents. We are preparing to start posting our messages in both English and Spanish, so more residents can engage with the system. Recommendation(s)/Next Step(s): RECEIVE an update on the Community Warning System from the Office of the Sheriff.  Attachments No file(s) attached. Page 9 of 32 PUBLIC PROTECTION COMMITTEE 5. Meeting Date:09/27/2021 Subject:Animal Services City Contracts Submitted For: Beth Ward, Animal Services Director  Department:Animal Services Referral No.: n/a Referral Name: n/a  Presenter: Beth Ward, Animal Services Director Contact: Paul Reyes, 925-655-2049 Referral History: The Department’s city service agreements were established in 1985. The agreements stipulate services for mandated programs and the enforcement of all animal related laws. The original city fees were based on Department costs at that time and on a city’s population (per capita). Historically the County has subsidized a significant portion of the contracted cities' cost for Animal Services. The County’s general Fund contribution has often exceeded $20.00 per capita for unincorporated residents while the cities have paid as low as $1.25 to the present $6.79 per capita. In 2005 and 2006, the Animal Services Department increased city fees for animal services each fiscal year based on the municipality’s population growth and the Consumer Price Index (CPI) percentage.  In FY 2011/12, the Department suspended the annual CPI increase as a result of the economic environment at that time. The annual CPI increase was reinstated in FY 2016/17, though no action was taken at that time to address the gap left by the four-year suspension of rate increases. Therefore, on November 4, 2019 the Animal Services Department presented to the County Finance Committee a cost analysis and the need to increase contracted city fees for service to the 18 cities. The County Finance Committee agreed with the staff’s analysis and recommendations and referred them to the Board of Supervisor. On January 7, 2020, the Board of Supervisors approved the Department’s cost analysis report and recommendations to increase the fees with an updated agreement for animal control service to the contracted cities. On March 12, 2020 the through the Public Managers Association (PMA) the cities notified the County that they were not in agreement with the Department’s proposed new fee schedule and service agreement. As a result of that discussion, in May of 2020, the Department advised the cities of a revised fee for service for FY 2020/21 that represented the cost per capita increased by the CPI as outlined in the original agreement from FY 2005/06. In September of 2020, the Department advised the cities of staffing and service level reductions Page 10 of 32 that were necessary to reduce costs in response to the cities' rejection of the County's proposed fee increases. On October 5, 2020, the Department reduced its services to the contracted cities as a cost savings measure: Field Services unit’s operating hours were adjusted from 8:00 AM – 12:00 AM to 8:00 AM – 9:00 PM, seven days a week. 1. On-call Field Services coverage was eliminated and the afterhours on-call staff were moved to provide appropriate coverage during peak service hours. 2. The Department started refering all wildlife calls to the California Department of Fish and Wildlife or Lindsay Wildlife Experience, except if rabies exposure is reported.  3. Field Services ceased picking up deceased wild animal pickups on private property.4. All calls for assistance regarding animals caught in storm drains were to be referred to a city’s Public Works Department. 5. The reduction in services allowed the Department to lower its response times, reduce the calls for activities, while serving the public in a more appropriate timeframe. Referral Update: In February 2021, the Department requested to meet with the Public Managers Association (PMA) to discuss again the animal services fee rates. The Department advised the contracted cities that if a sustainable fee plan was not established for FY 2022/23, the Department would again have to reduce services levels, due to the lack of revenue to maintain its operations. During the February 2021 meeting the PMA also requested the Department to assess its deceased animal impound services in comparison to third-party contracted services. The reason for the request was to assess if the cost for services provided by the County would be less if the services were contracted out to a third party. Historically, deceased animal services have been a priority for contracted cities and their citizens. April 28, 2021, the Department also met with the Chief’s Association on their areas of concerns around the Department’s services level impacts, which were: Lack of appropriate staffing for deceased animal pick-ups1. Citizen complaints around lack of response for sick or injured wildlife2. Inadequate beat coverage by Animal Service Officers (ASO)3. Impact on local police when ASOs are not available or delayed in response4. In May 2021, the Department finalized the deceased animal cost analysis and presented them to the PMA. The findings confirmed that the cost for services with a third-party vendor to provide the same service was significantly higher than the Department’s cost for services. The Department’s findings and recommendations led the City Managers to approve funding to the Department for an additional 1.0 FTE Field Utility Worker. In August 2021, the Department scheduled follow-up meetings with various contracted cities to discuss the next steps and the Department’s need to increase its cost for services. The Department advised the contracted cities at these meetings that if further action is not taken and additional department revenues are not secured from contracted cities, service levels will be continuing to be Page 11 of 32 reduced beginning with FY 2022/23. Recommendation In order to sustain current staffing and service levels, along with the County’s population growth, the Department recommends a revised fee structure methodology, which would include a reconciliation based on year-end actual expenditures. Effective FY 2022/23 the new methodology and cost formulation would be: Per Capita Rate = (Projected total cost for services less animal licensing, user fees, and general fund contribution) ÷ Population of incorporated contracted cities Projected Rates  The above amounts for FY 22/23 and beyond are estimates and subject to change. The final rates would be distributed to the contract cities in March for the following fiscal year. CONSEQUENCE OF NEGATIVE ACTION: No immediate impact if the Committee does not approve the Department's proposal. However without additional revenue the following impacts would likely occur in FY 2022/23:  Reduce public shelter service hours1. Further reduction of Field Operation Services hours of operations2. An increase in sheltered animals’ euthanasia rates for animals with treatable conditions outside of the Department’s veterinary scope of services and financial resources. 3. Reduction or possible elimination of Community Education programs4. Additionally, if certain cities decline to agree to the new contracts and fee structure then the Department would likely only be able to provide the cities those services that are mandated by State statute. Fiscal Year Per Capita Rate 2021/22 6.79 2022/23 7.66 2023/24 8.26 2024/25 8.87 2025/26 9.52 2026/27 10.19 Recommendation(s)/Next Step(s): 1. ACCEPT a proposal from the Animal Services Department on contracted city services, including a revised fee structure; and  2. DIRECT the Animal Services Department to discuss the proposed changes to contract fees with the cities and prepare a new contract and fee schedule for the contract cities for consideration by the Board of Supervisors. Fiscal Impact (if any): No fiscal impact at this time. If additional department revenues are not secured from contracted Page 12 of 32 No fiscal impact at this time. If additional department revenues are not secured from contracted cities, then the service levels to contract cities will need to be reduced. Attachments Animal Services Organization Chart Animal Services Presentation Page 13 of 32 1Page 14 of 32 CONTRA COSTA COUNTY ANIMAL SERVICES PUBLIC PROTECTION COMMITTEE SEPTEMBER 27, 2021 1 Page 15 of 32 City Service Agreement History Overview The city service agreements were established in 1985. The agreements stipulate services for mandated programs and the enforcement of all animal related laws. The original city fees were based on Department costs at that time and on a city’s population (per capita). In 2005 and 2006, the Animal Services Department increased city fees for animal services each fiscal year based on the municipality’s population growth and the Consumer Price Index (CPI) percentage. In FY 11/12, the Department suspended the annual CPI increase as a result of the economic environment at that time. The annual CPI increase was reinstated in FY 16/17, though no action was taken at that time to address the gap left by the four-year suspension of rate increases. 2 Page 16 of 32 2020 City Agreement Discussions In January of 2020, the Board of Supervisors approved the Finance Committee’s recommendation to increase city fees and the cities were notified. During the March 2020 Public Managers Association (PMA) meeting, the County was notified that the cities were not in agreement with the proposed new fee schedule and service agreement. In May of 2020, CCAS advised the cities of a revised fee for service in FY20/21 as requested during the March PMA meeting. The revised fee was based on CPI of 2.5% above FY 19/20 fees of $6.38 per capita. The fees for FY 20/21 were set at $6.54 per capita. In September of 2020, the Department advised the cities of service level changes that would become effective 10/5/20 due to the lack of appropriate funding allocations. 3 Page 17 of 32 What do the city fees pay for? 4 Contra Costa County Animal Services provides a full complement of services for our city residents. •Field Service Officers –enforcement and community service •A 38,000 sq. ft facility to house animals while they are in our care •A medical and husbandry team to provide basic daily care to the animals as well as any necessary medical care. •An administrative team to manage a call center, support dispatch services, assist the public in person, online, by phone. •A team to support administrative hearings for dangerous animals and noise violations. Page 18 of 32 City Service Agreement Challenges Fees inadequate to support expenses for services provided. Expenses to provide services grew faster than city revenues. Population/needs for services increased. Response times increased while call volume backed up and became overwhelming. City agreements only cover mandated services. 5 Page 19 of 32 Mandated Services Covered By Current Fees 6 Special Enforcement Mandatory Spay/Neuter Prior to Adoption (as required per County Ordinance) Major Case Investigations Re: Cruelty Animal Housing Stray & Aggressive Animal Patrols (Inc. Livestock) Impoundment of Stray Dogs, Sick/Injured/In Danger & Aggressive Animals Sheltering/Care of Impounded Animals (Inc. Vaccination, Food, Humane & Emergency Veterinary Care, etc.) Housing for Animals Displaced by Disasters Return Animals Home & Adoption/Transfer of Available Animals Rabies Control Licensing & Enforcement Bite Investigations Patrols Quarantine of Potential Rabies Suspects Rabies Testing Rabies Vaccine Clinics Dangerous/Potentially Dangerous Animals Investigations Impoundment & Sheltering Hearings Permits & Enforcement Other State & Local Laws Animal Noise Enforcement & Hearings Fulfilling PRA Requests Page 20 of 32 Non-mandated Services Provided By CCAS 7 Low-cost Vaccine & S/N Clinic for Residents of Contra Costa County Humane Education & Enrichment Programs Deceased Animal Impoundment Deceased animals located on the public right of way. Deceased domestic animals on private property. Local Agency Assists Police Fire Code Enforcement Administration Provide support for on-going operations – budget and fiscal services, human resources, contract management, fleet management and information technology In house call center –five days a week, T- Sat. Phone, online, email and in person by appointment Dispatch services through SO contract 24/7 Page 21 of 32 Population & Revenue Comparison 8 866,784 174,257 2020 E1 Population Report Incorp. Unincorp. *Incorporated population excludes City of Antioch $5,890,696 $2,200,000 $4,112,000 CCAS FY 2021/22 Revenue Sources City Revenue User Fee Revenue General Fund Page 22 of 32 City Agreement Fee Increases 9 Fiscal Year CPI Fees Per Capita FY 17/18 3.5%$5.94 FY 18/19 2.9%$6.11 FY 19/20 4.5%$6.38 FY 20/21 2.5%$6.54 *FY 21/22 2.0%$6.79 •FY21/22 rate was presented in February 2021at: $6.67 •*An additional 12 cents was added for deceased animal services, per the request of the PMA in July 2021 •FY 21/22 rate: $6.79 Cost/Usage Comparison •Most jurisdictions utilize a level of services similar to the percentage of costs they pay. Page 23 of 32 City Agreement Allocations FY 2021/22 10 CITIES Population New Rate FY 2021-22 Cost Variance Compared to FY 2020/21 Brentwood 65,118 $6.79 $442,151.22 $25,801.74 Clayton 11,337 $6.79 $76,978.23 $767.61 Concord 130,143 $6.79 $883,670.97 $34,196.91 Danville 43,876 $6.79 $297,918.04 $1,852.24 El Cerrito 24,953 $6.79 $169,430.87 $2,929.01 Hercules 25,530 $6.79 $173,348.70 $1,843.74 Lafayette 25,604 $6.79 $173,851.16 $1,672.58 Martinez 37,106 $6.79 $251,949.74 $225.14 Moraga 16,946 $6.79 $115,063.34 $4,282.28 Oakley 42,461 $6.79 $288,310.19 $15,206.33 Orinda 19,009 $6.79 $129,071.11 $1,704.61 Pinole 19,505 $6.79 $132,438.95 $4,922.03 Pittsburg 74,321 $6.79 $504,639.59 $30,221.45 Pleasant Hill 34,267 $6.79 $232,672.93 $3,413.23 Richmond 111,217 $6.79 $755,163.43 $32,911.99 San Pablo 31,413 $6.79 $213,294.27 $5,211.09 San Ramon 83,118 $6.79 $564,371.22 $15,292.44 Walnut Creek 70,860 $6.79 $481,139.40 $22,548.06 866,784 $5,885,463.36 $205,002.48 Page 24 of 32 Animal Care Agency Comparisons Municipal Shelter: FY 20/21 Rate Per Capita City of Antioch $16.63 City of Oakland $12.18 Sacramento County $25.53 Contra Costa County $6.79 Contra Costa Animal Services ranks low on cost per capita in comparison to other municipal shelters. The City of Antioch increased their fees for animal services by 9%from FY 2020/21 to 2021/22, which brought them to $16.63 per capita. 11 * Fees exclude “user fees” (i.e., licensing, fee schedule fees, etc.) Page 25 of 32 Revenue allocations 12 FY Total Expenses City Revenue Lic. & User Fees General Fund Total Revenue GF% 2007/08 $9,991,000 $3,214,000 $2,766,000 $4,011,000 $9,991,000 40% 2008/09 $10,439,000 $3,640,000 $2,834,000 $3,965,000 $10,439,000 38% 2009/10 $10,106,000 $4,029,000 $2,781,000 $3,296,000 $10,106,000 33% 2010/11 $10,206,000 $4,190,000 $2,861,000 $3,155,000 $10,206,000 31% 2011/12 $10,498,000 $4,246,000 $3,097,000 $3,155,000 $10,498,000 30% 2012/13 $10,501,000 $4,205,000 $3,097,000 $3,199,000 $10,501,000 30% 2013/14 $10,739,000 $4,240,000 $3,282,000 $3,217,000 $10,739,000 30% 2014/15 $10,891,000 $4,279,000 $3,282,000 $3,330,000 $10,891,000 31% 2015/16 $11,603,000 $4,529,000 $2,850,000 $4,224,000 $11,603,000 36% 2016/17 $12,221,000 $4,743,000 $3,230,000 $4,248,000 $12,221,000 35% 2017/18 $12,592,000 $4,986,000 $2,832,000 $4,774,000 $12,592,000 38% *2018/19 $12,907,000 $5,205,000 $2,390,000 $5,312,000 $12,907,000 41% *2019/20 $13,505,000 $5,515,000 $2,325,000 $5,665,000 $13,505,000 42% 2020/21 $12,812,000 $5,685,000 $2,325,000 $4,802,000 $12,812,000 37% 2021/22 $11,869,000 $5,787,000 $1,970,000 $4,112,000 $11,869,000 35% * The Department received one-time General Fund funding for FY 2018/19 & FY 2019/20 for capital projects. Page 26 of 32 FY 2021/22 County General Fund Per Capita Rate 13 2020 Unincorporated Population 174,257 FY 20/21 General Fund Allocation $4,112,000 General Fund Per Capita Cost $23.60 Historically the County has subsidized a significant portion of the contracted cities’ cost for Animal Services. The County’s general Fund contribution has often exceeded $20.00 per capita for unincorporated residents while the cities have paid as low as $1.25 to the present $6.79 per capita. Page 27 of 32 CCAS 5-Year FY Projected Deficit 14 $0 $2,000,000 $4,000,000 $6,000,000 $8,000,000 $10,000,000 $12,000,000 $14,000,000 $16,000,000 FY 2021/22 FY 2022/23 FY 2023/24 FY 2024/25 FY 2025/26 FY 2026/27 Personnel Operations City Revenue General Fund Lic. & User Fees Total Revenue Page 28 of 32 CCAS 5-Year FY Cost Recovery Plan 15 $0 $2,000,000 $4,000,000 $6,000,000 $8,000,000 $10,000,000 $12,000,000 $14,000,000 $16,000,000 FY 2021/22 FY 2022/23 FY 2023/24 FY 2024/25 FY 2025/26 FY 2026/27 Personnel Operations City Revenue General Fund Lic. & User Fees Total Revenue Page 29 of 32 Recommendations: 16 In order to sustain current staffing and service levels, along with the County’s population growth, the Department recommends a revised fee structure methodology, which would include a reconciliation based on year-end actual expenditures. Effective FY 2022/23 the new methodology and cost formulation would be: Per Capita rate = Projected total cost for services –less animal licensing, user fees, and general fund contribution Population of incorporated contracted cities Page 30 of 32 CCAS 5-Year FY Recovery Plan Details 17 FY 2021/22 FY 2022/23 FY 2023/24 FY 2024/25 FY 2025/26 FY 2026/27 Total Expenses:$11,868,682 $12,375,400 $12,903,984 $13,455,391 $14,030,616 $14,630,701 Personnel $8,671,655 $9,018,521 $9,379,262 $9,754,433 $10,144,610 $10,550,394 Operations $3,197,027 $3,356,878 $3,524,722 $3,700,958 $3,886,006 $4,080,307 Total Revenue $11,868,682 $12,375,400 $12,903,984 $13,455,391 $14,030,616 $14,630,701 City Revenue $5,786,682 $6,643,400 $7,155,784 $7,690,829 $8,249,529 $8,832,922 Lic. & User Fees $1,970,000 $1,620,000 $1,636,200 $1,652,562 $1,669,088 $1,685,778 General Fund $4,112,000 $4,112,000 $4,112,000 $4,112,000 $4,112,000 $4,112,000 Rate for Service:$6.79 $7.66 $8.26 $8.87 $9.52 $10.19 The above amounts for FY 22/23 and beyond are estimates and subject to change. The final rates would be distributed to the contract cities in March for the following fiscal year. Page 31 of 32 Thank You & Questions We appreciate our city partners! Page 32 of 32