Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAboutMINUTES - 05241994 - 2.4 TO: BOARD OF SUPERVISORS ontra FROM: PHIL BATCHELOR _ • Costa a •s County Administrator -� County OprTA'&U, C'y DATE: May 24, 1994 SUBJECT: STATUS REPORT REGARDING CRIMINAL JUSTICE ADMINISTRATIVE (BOOKING) FEE RECOMMENDATION: Direct and authorize the County Administrator to implement the increased criminal,justice administrative (booking) fee of $137.00 beginning June 1, 1994. REASONS FOR RECOMMENDATION/BACKGROUND: On March 22, 1994, the Board of Supervisors adopted an Ordinance to increase the criminal justice administrative (booking) fee to $137.00. The provisions of the Ordinance became effective on April 22, 1994. However, in recognition of concerns expressed by city police representatives at the March 15, 1994 public hearing, the Board directed the County Administrator to suspend the fee increase pending the outcome of discussions between the County Administrator and concerned arresting agencies regarding the increased fee. Arresting agencies are currently being charged a booking fee of $121 .00, or $16.00 less than the new fee of $137.00. On May 2, 1994, representatives of the County Administrator met with members of a committee established by the Police Chiefs' Association to discuss arresting agencies' concerns regarding the increased fee. Two city representatives attended; from the City of Concord and the Town of Moraga to review the fee calculation. Attached are correspondence with committee members clarifying fee calculation questions and issues. As a result of discussions about the fee, the County Administrator recommends implementation of the increased fee beginning June 1, 1994. Continued on Attachment: r/ YES Signature: j Recommendation of County Administrator Recommendation of Board Committee Approve Other Signature(s): Action of Board on: Approved as Recommended _� Other Vote of Supervisors: Unanimous (Absent) ) Ayes: Noes: I HEREBY CERTIFY THAT THIS IS A TRUE AND CORRECT COPY OF AN ACTION TAKEN AND ENTERED ON THE MINUTES OF THE BOARD OF SUPERVISORS ON THE DATE SHOWN.. Attested: x-'}1/1 m„„ Phil Batchelor, Clerk the Board .of Supervisors and County Administrator By: L -,Deputy Deputy Contact: George Roemer or Julie Enea (510) 646-4855 cc: County Administrator County Counsel Auditor-Controller Sheriff-Coroner Office of Revenue Collection Municipal Courts Administration Chief J. Bray, President, Police Chiefs' Association County AdministratorContra Board of Supervisors Tom Powers County Administration BuildingCo +� 1st District Costa 651 Pine Street,11th Floor J l Jeff Smith Martinez,California 94553-1229 County` , 2nd District (510)646-4080 `Y FAX:(510)646-4098 Gayle Bishop E L 3rd District Phil Batchelor /-:�' �. Sunne Wright McPeak County Administrator [7-T j g\ 4th District Jsi Tom Torlakson r.: 5th District April 29; 1994 r� court' David Chilimidos, Sergeant Administration Bureau Concord Police Department 1950 Parkside Drive Concord, CA 94519 Dear Sergeant Chilimidos: Your letter to George Roemer regarding concerns relating to the proposed booking fee increase was referred to me for response. I prepared, with the assistance of the Auditor's Office, the re-calculation of the booking fee. I can provide the following information in response to your concerns. 1. Clearly identify those functions claimed by the Sheriff to be "actual administrative costs" as prescribed by Penal Code section 29550. Those booking functions which the Sheriff performs and for which the County is entitled to recover its actual administrative costs, pursuant to Government Code Section 29550, include: (1) The searching, wristbanding, bathing, clothing, fingerprinting, photographing, and medical and mental screening of an' arrestee. (2) Document preparation, retrieval, updating, filing,and court scheduling related to receiving an arrestee into the detention facility. (3) Warrant service, processing and detainer. (4) Inventory of an arrestee's money and creation of cash accounts. (5) Inventory and storage of an arrestees property and clothing. (6) The classification of an arrestee. (7) The direct costs of automated services utilized in the above functions. (8) Unit management and supervision of the detention function as related to the above functions. (9) Applicable overhead costs as related to the above functions, in accordance with Federal Circular A-87 standards. Costs for release processing, capital and facilities, and CIB are excluded from the fee, as are costs involved in the housing, feeding and care of inmates. David Chilimidos Page 2 2. The "average annual bookings" as found on "schedule 12" are obviously computed by considering fourteen consecutive twelve month periods. In essence, this portrays the number of bookings as being relatively constant. Wouldn't a more realistic representation of the number of bookings be portrayed by using the monthly figures? If you're suggesting using the average monthly bookings over the 25 month period shown, and then projecting an annual amount from the average monthly bookings, I believe that would result in a skewed representation of average annual bookings. The goal is to arrive at a reasonable estimate of annual bookings for the current fiscal year. The most straight-forward method would be to take the sum of the last 12 months. However, at each recalculation, that sum would be volatile and sensitive to aberrations. Since the booking fee calculation is based on an annual period, it is most appropriate to use annual periods in the analysis. Use of a long-term average of annual periods has a stabilizing effect, often referred to as the "law of large numbers" which, in my opinion, is the most realistic representation of the trend in the number of annual bookings. The long-term average value also benefits the arresting agencies in comparison to the sum of the last 12 months. Ifwe were to use the last 12 month period, the estimate of annual bookings would be 22,029. This would result in an increased fee of $143.00 ($3,156,776 divided by 22,209 bookings, rounded). 3. What percentage of the Sheriff's staff is considered in the computation of "actual administrative costs"? Are personnel such as supervising dispatchers, registered nurses,and mental health specialists legitimately folded into the allocation method? The full-time equivalent (FTE)booking staff of 34 represents approximately 20% of the Martinez Detention Facility FTE, 10% of all Detention FTE, and about 4% of all Sheriff Department FTE. Registered nurses and mental health clinical specialists are the county classifications for the individuals responsible for performing the medical and mental screening of arrestees. Supervising dispatcher is the county classification for the individual who periodically provides support on the automated booking system. In accordance with the definition of "actual administrative costs" contained in the Pringle Bill, costs for these individuals as they relate to the booking function are legitimately included in the fee calculation. 4. "Schedule 3" lists a summary of services and supplies purportedly related to booking and therefore compensable under the law. How are expenditures such as "books/periodicals", "memberships", "computer software costs", "auto mileage", and the amorphous "other special deptl (sic) expense" justifiably related to actual booking costs? The services and supplies costs detailed in Schedule 3 were included . as and justifiable as either direct or indirect costs.. "Other Special Departmental Expense" David Chilimidos Page 3 is a generic County account for specialty items relaated to a particular department's operations.. In the Martinez Detention Facility budget, the film used in photo mugshots is charged to this account, an expense which is related exclusively to booking. For this reason, this expense was charged as a direct cost. With the exception of certain services and supplies which were considered completely unrelated to booking and which were disallowed, all other services and supplies were allocated as indirect costs. Indirect costs are those that have been incurred for common or joint objectives and cannot be readily identified with a specific program. As prescribed by Federal Circular A-87, they are usually allocated to the various benefitting programs using a common basis. In our analysis, direct salaries and benefits served as the allocation basis. As a result of this allocation, only the booking function proportion of these costs was included in the fee calculation. I hope this explanation satisfies your concerns relating to the proposed booking fee increase. Sincerely, �L1LIE ENEA Management Analyst cc: George Roemer, Senior Deputy County Administrator Paul Abelson, Auditor's Office MaryAnn McNett Mason, Deputy County Counsel 02 l County AdministratorContra Board of Supervisors Tom Powers County Administration Building Costa 1st District 651 Pine Street,11th Floor Jett Smith Martinez,California 94553-1229 County 2nd District (510)646-4080 FAX:(510)646-4098 Gayle Bishop 3rd District SE__C Phil Batchelor "•Q Sunne Wright McPeak County Administrator r `7__L•' 4th District Tom Todakson V .r 5th District May 19, 1994 Chief Barry Kalar 350 Rheem Boulevard Moraga, CA 94556 Sergeant David Chilimidos Concord Police Department Willow Pass Road and Parkside Drive Concord, CA 94519 Dear Chief Kalar and Sergeant Chilimidos: Thank you for your attendance at the May 2, 1994 meeting to discuss arresting agencies' concerns regarding the recalculation of the County booking fee. In addition to the written responses we provided to your April 1 letter, we can offer the following information related to concerns expressed at the meeting. 1 . Why is booking staff time reported greater on the morning shift than on the other shifts? What is significant about the morning shift? The morning shift is a ten-hour shift in comparison to the other two shifts which are eight hours in duration each. This shift configuration provides for 26 hours of staff coverage in each 24-hour period, allowing some overlap between the beginning and ending of each shift. Overlapping of shifts if necessary to enable staff to meet and exchange important information between shifts. The three shifts are approximately as follows: Day 7:15 a.m. to 3:15 p.m. ( -8 hours) Night 2:30 p.m. to 10:30 p.m. ( 8 hours) Morning 10:00 p.m. 'to 8:00 a.m. (10 hours) 2. If POST training is included in Sheriff Department Administration's Professional/Specialized Services Account(Account 2310),isn't it State reimbursable? POST training, in fact, is not charged to the Professional/Specialized Services account as we speculated. Charges to that account primarily include occupational health services (psychological counseling for staff) and arbitration services, which are both allowable costs under Federal Circular A-87. These costs are not reimbursable. POST training costs are charged to a separate Sheriff Department organizational unit and are not reflected in the booking fee. 3. In the absence of a letter from the Jail Management System (JMS) vendor verifying that booking is 25% of the total JMS project, shouldn't the JMS system costs be allocated as an indirect cost at 24.1% rather than a direct cost at 25%? The 0.9% difference which would result from charging JMS as an indirect cost rather than a direct cost would have no impact on the dollar amount of the booking fee. However, JMS is more appropriately charged as a direct cost since the vendor, the system expert, was able to provide us with an estimate of the portion of the system which relates specifically to booking. Attached please find a copy of a recent letter from BI Incorporated, the JMS system vendor, documenting their verbal estimate. We believe this documentation is sufficient to support the JMS system as a direct booking fee cost. We appreciated the opportunity to discuss the booking fee calculation with you. The recalculated fee of $137.00 went into effect on April 22, 1994. However, in respect to efforts being made to resolve concerns related to the new fee, the Board permitted a delay in the implementation of the increased fee. As a result of our discussions, we will be recommending to the Board that the fee increase be implemented beginning June 1, 1994. Thank you for working with us to resolve booking fee recalculation concerns. Sincerely, /J X /J IE ENEA Management Analyst cc: James Bray, President, Police Chiefs' Association I IHY-1'f-1774 IU'37 rKUVI 5f r-Klrr 5 ilvru 51 Z:)I GI'I5 I u F.Ul 1 M C Q N F A E 0 May 10, 199+4 8x08 Lour Ao�d BadAer cotor.�r 303 $30•29U fw 303.630.5340 OM Fly,Pry Admrrielrator Conn Costs County SfeOW-COM Mr 10 OwOn OrWo She IOOA Martina,:, CA 94593 Dear Dawe, 1 spoke whh our JMS Cuswmw$%won rwreaerti ovo,Sheri&Mo. and learned OW yw fteded a letter 4owmord"Ow coat of the JMS&mkft Process. In retatlon to the entire J84 ManaDemo nt SystaM. The t'w"V Proses is the most comwex selament of the Jed Momaonent System and accowm for 2544 of the arMtali purchase once of JMS, If l can be of additkmW sd vko to you,pose don't hesistalta to Call. S�11f. Rat C wmg Vice President, Institutional Systems P_02 MAY-16-19134 19):10 9�i/.