Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAboutAGENDA REPORT 1991 0206 CC REG ITEM 11Ai MOORPARK ITEM// City Council Meeflng 1 BERNARDO M. PEREZ STEVEN KUENY Mayor °f - -_ -= 9 / f 0'P,c C,`, o SCOTT MONTGOMERY o M Mayor Pro Tern ELOISE BROWN Councilmember CLINT HARPER, Ph.D. Councilmember PAUL W. LAWRASON, Jr. Councilmember LILLIAN KELLERMAN City Clerk DATE =�'_ +F. J E C T -AC- 'ROUND BY 1 ;riDRIt_;' EL. *,-Lf' t �lAl�lT .JANUARY -(), 1�Ft ty anger MOORp CHERYL J. KANE Cr � CAUFOrdgK City Attorney ��aMe�RICK RICHARDS, A.I.C.P. Of Director of mmunity Development '4G7�ON: R. DENNIS DELZEIT City Engineer JOHN V. GILLESPIE BY Chief of Police ARD T. HARE City Treasurer "10OR!"ARI, " S LAW ENFORCEMENT ASSISTANCE PROGRAM - A CITIZEN' POTRO'L In response to a growing concern over the escalating Of graffiti and vandalism occurring throughout the cit�na2group c,f c .tizens chaired a. / group public forum in Jul/ 199r7.to address these issues. The purpose of this meeting was to make the public aware of the growing vandalism /graffiti problems in the city and to solicit citizen participation in a citizen patrol group. Referred to as "Graffiti Busters", the group's intent was to patrol the city with the specific intent of deterring graffiti and r-_,thF_r ct-- f - o Van£ial i._r?I. r P a rl +'; t',. ,_,n 1t i t ` -u �: Y"�c,' � fTt _.ri_ s.ICnP j_i {-; -- er : e >✓ �i .r, r r_ ITI'.'r l t ,_ _; f ; f_ e r n �._. which d. - - r ^ C. . c C? e�i_'`.j_.,r._ ri i , rFrte! �� ,�rt(nd the l5!i.- of Ir- �44'iU1. 1 2. .k i `t- t t i nr', rid '}, -I "i .'fi t, ti,f hr;_F,;1 Wit.. ;d ._art'_ 7 '%iC= t_ f- _) r, rr' p' -' -- = f -,r irr;r'I'li= _l;;rl rr,l_Llri �It: ;l•t ci -� ' -'1 n n (71 e e } j j 1 H. t =� fi Q �1-r r _.tf= r;�r�'_r_i�; _ _ _�,_r r,,•r'�t lt + rdep arI11ler Ft� - a _ i r+ 799 Moorpark Avenue Moorpark, California 93021 (805) 529 -6864 Page LEAP Staff Report this redirection, staff identified specific concerns that had to be resolved to the police department's satisfaction before it would consider sponsoring a citizen patrol group under the auspices of the Sheriff's Department. One of the specific concerns that staff identified was the narrow scope that dealt only with graffiti and vandalism. Staff expressed its awareness of general citizen concern over the- Proposed group's activities which might focus exclusively an the ONnt,own area. Staff recommended that the group must broaden its focus to generally include the reporting of suspicious or Unlawful behavior, similar to Neighborhood Watch, and other civic services to relieve public apprehension. This change of focus has resulted in a new name for the proposed group that identified it as Moorpark:'s Law Enforcement Assistance Program (LEAP). The Honorable City Council received a staff report at its regularly scheduled council meeting (11 G.) on October 3, 1990 that gave Council a progress report on the LEAP group. A copy of that report is attached. The staff report provided an overview of the proposed group's intended activities, gave a description of other citizen patrol programs under the auspices of the Sheriff, 'potential fiscal impact to the city and identified concerns with potential liability that required resolution. Staff had previously contacted the Ventura County Counsel's Office for an opinion on a list of questions and concerns to both the city and Sheriff's Department. Unfortunately, staff had not received a. response when Council received the October Ord staff report. Staff has recently received a COuntY Counsel Opinion addressing �dressinn a i0sues and is prepared to report address Council's concerns. CITY COUNCIL 'SHERIFF ' S CONCERNS Staff requested information with reference to liabilities and °! _.nonsi_bil i ties involved in the activities c2tizens of the of _ qr- ni_ip of - of Moorpark referred to as "Graffiti busters/Law f=n . or-r_r,i%1ent Assistance Program (LEAP) 1 Paae ._ LEAP Staff Report Questions Presented -------- ----------- 1. A specific overview of the various liability issues that may result to both the City and County as a result of the Proposed group's activities. 2. If the group organizes under the auspices of the Sheriff's Department, who incurs the liability for the group' behavior? . What liability will Moorpar}: incur for the group's activities? 4. General information on other liability issues that the County has encountered as the result of the activities of citizen patrol groups in Ojai and Camarillo. 5. If liability lies with the Sheriff (County), what should be done to mitigate this issue? 6. Does the Public Information Act limit or prevent the City and /or County's ability to withhold the group's membership roster from the general public? 7. If the group's potential member's names are provided to the Sheriff for screening, can they be Vept confidential from the public by the Sheriff or city? Conclusion f 1. Liability of a. public entity is entirely controlled by s t at statutes; there is no common law liability. 'l The County, through the Sheriff, -. I, - , 1.ncur_. liability for the behavior- 3. Moor-par•-k may incur liability for tortious .= �.�_ts o- members �,{ the grOuP under specified ri Y = ;_�rTi'�f. antes_ - 4. The degree of the Ojai - suPer""On a" cuntrCil over the nn Senior Patrol indicate - - mJ_ -i= r /e T - y e- f -1 -_1ofi hip rather that an = ssOc_i ati r_n independent from the Sheriff's Department. Thor el r. E- " , liability frlr_ any act or 0""n Of a member of thiA OrDuP would ri r-, .- r,1 v r✓ upon the Sheriff's T;ePa.rtment and th r: ouq Page 4 LEAP Staff Report 5. County procedures should be developed to minimize or eliminate exposure to possible liability. Such procedures should include formulation of operating rules and regulations and review of the group's activities to assure compliance. 6. The Public Records Act, Government Code section 6250 et.seq., favors the disclosure of the group's membership roster. 7. Unless the Sheriff can justify nondisclosure, the names of Potential members of the LEAP group must be disclosed. Overview of Liability Issues ____________________________ Liability of a public entity, such as the County and the City of Moorpark, is entirely controlled by the provisions of Government Code section 810 et seq., generally referred to as the Tort Claims Act. Section 815 provides as follows: "Except as otherwise provided by statute: ' Na) A public entity is not liable for an injury, whether such injury arises out of an act or omission of the public entity or a public employee or any other person. "(b) The liability of a public entity established by this Part is subject to any immunity of the public entity provided by statute, and is subject to any defenses that would be available to the puulic entity if it were a private pe+son.^ Consequently, there is no common 1aw government tort liability in California; in the absence of some constitutional requirement, public entities ma, be liable only if a statute Walares them liahle. A liabi]j,, s dcemed Provided by statute if a statute defines the tort )o generai terms. Under the provisions of Government Code section 810.2 "employee" includes unpaid volunteers, anK section 311.4 provides that ^public employee" means an -mulGyee of a public entity. Accordingly, one who works for a public entity as an unpaid volunteer is an employee of the publlc entity for the purposes of the Tort Claims Act. Page 5 LEAP Staff Report Thus, under Government Code section 815.2, the general rule of respondeat superior gives rise to vicarious liability of the public entity for torts of unpaid volunteer- employees committed within the scope of their employment. Consequently, the liability of the County and the City of Moorpark with reference to the operation of -_ citizens' patrol group depends upon the contractual - ej_ti_(_hir between the. County and the City, and whether- the memlber of the r ' gr�up are employees loyee5 of the Sheriff's _epa t -it` or affiliated ai th the Ci ty or are a completely autonomous group. Contractual Relationship Between the -C unt__- _._____City f - c_.n any, the , Moorpark.; Liability of Ventura. County: On June 2, 1954, the County of Ventura and the City of Moorpark_ entered into a general services agreement contract. The contract included general terms and conditions and specific provisions under which the County through its Sheriff "shall provide general Law Enforcement Services- within the corporate limits of the City of Moorpark; these provision_ were set forth in an Exhibit A of the Agreement entitled ,Service - General Law Enforcement.'' Section 2 of the Terms and Conditions of the Agreement provides that all persons employed in the performance of the services and functions for the City of Moorpark. shall be employed by the County. AS proposed this employer/employee relationship iGn_hip between the Sheriff and he _PP members - =.I_:n�,_,rte•d by the following factors: - - - -. 1- 1-he services to be partnrmerj by LLAj -' members _ =:.r'e Of a type generally Perform_- by law enforcement f f 2. The oversight of the LEAF group would be Sheriff's Department staff, and = The services of a member Df thr__, LEAP Mom may be terminated by the Sheriff- Accordingly, Sheriff's r'ir ,,_. r `_fiiel- t , + - - = i acts _ e( 1 and _ - Ccontv woold be b for their Or Omissions within the sin of their T i _ - - T _ _ , pursuant to + he Tort Claim_ Act; their tl_ purpose would be he same as that o f Sr er T - deputies or Other Sheriff's employees Page b LEAF Staff Report As to the relationship between the Sheriff (County) and the City of Moorpark:, the primary factor in determining the status of one who performs services for another is whether the person for whom the work: is done has the legal right to control the activities of the person doing the work. if the person employed has the right to control the mode of doing the work:, he is an independent contractor. The test is who has the right to direct what shall be done and when and how it shall be done, if the' one who performs the service is not subject to control but is engaged to produce a certain result by means and in a. manner of his own choosing, he is an independent contractor. Section 2.4 of Exhibit A of the Agreement provides as follows: "The planning, organization, scheduling, direction, supervision, standards of performance and discipline of Sheriff's personnel and all other matters incidental to the deliver;: of general Law Enforcement Services to the City shall be determined by the Sheriff. The Sheriff shall retain the exclusive authority over the activities of his personnel working in the Cite.,, Section 2.6 of Exhibit A provides as follows: "In the event of a dispute between parties regarding the extent of the duties and functions to be rendered or the minimum level or manner of performance of such services, the determination made by the Sheriff shall be final and conclusive. " it is Count;: Counsel's judgment that under the terms of the Agreement, the County through the Sheriff is an independent contractor= Accordingly, the County i' l � i.abie for or- injuries caused by the negligence of the employee=_. (LEAP members) of the Sheriff's Department. Liability of City of Moor... Generally, the 1- he employer is not responsible for injury caused by he negligence of the independent contractor or his employees Performed in performing the services lawful under contract �_ Contract , where the and t -[ services to others, However, there -.?r ice=. ar-e i,t inherently injurious are man/ r;;Cc'ptir.ns to the rule of nonliabilit.y. Under- the provisions, of Government Code section 895.2 , whenever any public entities enter into Page 7 LEAP Staff Report and severally liable if any statutory liability is imposed on any one of them, or on an entity created by the agreement, for injury caused by a negligent or wrongful act or omission that occurred in the performance of the agreement. The public entity may provide for contribution or indemnification by any or all of the entities that are parties to the agreement on any liability arising out of its performance. In this connection;, Count;, Counsel notes that section 9 of the Term_ and Conditions of the Agreement constitutes an agreement of indemnification for the benefit of the City. Existing Patrol Groups In the .City of Ojai a Senior Patrol consisting of members over 55 years of age, works closely with the Sheriff's Department in many situations including the handling of parking for special events, bicycle registration, fingerprinting of school —age children, directing traffic in emergency situations, house checks for people on vacation and other services requested by the Sheriff's Department which supplements the activities of that department. Although the Senior Patrol plans its own schedule of working hours, the Senior Patrol seeks approval and advice from the Sheriff's Department before undertaking a new project. Generally, the Senior Patrol characterizes itself as "the eyes and ears" of the Sheriff's Department, and the members of the group describe themselves_. as "working for" the Sheriff. They report to the Sheriff's Department any incident of suspected law violation observed by them during the course of Performing their duties. However, a���_r -s thr�y dr. net become personally involved in such situations; they carry d o '�hr no weapons and do not attempt to make arrests. The Senior F'atrc'1 occupies a separate officl in the Sheriff's Department as its headquarters and has two Sheriff's Department vehic es for use in its patrolling activities. The members of the -rOU F near uniforms supplied d b/ tre Sheriff's Department : Sen degree - -r- s r and __ Lr -; t ue- th ope rations rat _on_of i -h e P;e�= c _r b the Sheriff's Department, and the `,,; c,s ne` us et � _ -weer! the Senior Department 'C' t_- i and the Sheriff's _vir_nreri by the _ _ _ -- -- and an office sup-1 -rJ to the ,_n i r - PatrDI by the _he- i f f• 5 - a =artf?rt, ird i r_te an =T P7 e ; _ ._ relationship rather than an - _ _-ci atio independent from the r ri fs -her fore, Department. for a -+ r - n`/ ac or Omission of a member of this Senior- Patrol would devolve _Prr the Sheriff • S Department the County. and Page a LEAF Staff Report Information was not received addressing the Camarillo Citizen Patrol, however, their activities are also monitored by a Sheriff's staff member and are required to comply with the requirements of formal rules and regulations in their operating manual. All equipment is provided by the members, at their own expense. Staff's previous report to Council described the activities of this group. Mitigation Measures Initially, if providing the services requested by the City involves the possibility of harm to others, where danger and Peril are inherent in the nature of the services to be rendered, the magnitude of the County's exposure to possible liability should be considered when the City requests performance of the services by the Sheriff. Secondarily, County Risk: Management procedures should be developed to minimize or eliminate exposure to possible liability. Such procedures should include oversight of LEAP activities by the Sheriff's Department staff, formulation of oPerating rules and regulations and review of activities to assure compliance by the LEAP membership. Risk. Management previously provided staff the opinion that work.mans compensation responsibilities would not be applicable to the activities of the LEAP group since their activities would be voluntary. However, if the group was specifically directed to perform an activity beyond the routine, ie., traffic control ctssi'st._n+_e, then workmans compensation responsibility would apply. riven County Counsel's Opinion staff ff must now clarify this ic_.t_le with Risk Management. D isE losu.re -of- LEAF - Rosters; -Publ i-c- Records - Act - Requirements: The Public Records Act (PRA) is contained in roverroment Code ==': -i lam 62QO of seq.; and provide_ that "local agen.= " includes = count;'. Therefore, answers t involving f .sure o questions n, is Znv01'ti'ing d i sclos! Ire Of County records are found in the - F'kA . Bo`,'Pr r"nt Code section 6250 provides that access to _'TO- fundamental fatl0 f- oncevning the conduct of the peo le' c business Z , ._. - scary right of every this person in i_s stctte. GovF;--rtrrent (_ode section 6254 exempts from disclosure Warsnnne 1 , u=ri_:1 s r similar files, the d7_= .ei- o5ure of wh_rl -t WO!lld Page 9 LEAF Staff Report constitute an unwarranted invasion of personal "records of intelligence information or securit privacy;" and any local police agency. `/ procedures of. Government Code section 6255 permits a government agency to withhold a record if it can demonstrate that on the facts of a Particular case the public interest served by record public clea.rl� not MaVing the / outweighs the public interest served by d1S_inc:une of the record. A roster- is a roll l or list of persons. If the roster- is a list Of LEAP members' names without - any of -her information, such a record would not be exempt from disclosure and would not constitute a personnel file. The general policy of the PRA favors disclosure, and the Sheriff .must justify LEAF roster by demonstrating that it withholding the Provisions of the PRA. is exempt under the As to the nondisclosure of the names of potential LEAP members Provided to the Sheriff for screening, such disclosure might not be required if the information comes within subdivision (a) of Government Code section 6254, "Preliminary draft notes, or interagency or, intra - agency memoranda which are not retained by the public agency in the ordinary course of business, provided that the Public in withholding these records clearly outweighs theln public interest in disclosure.'' Public The Primary rule of the PRA requires re uir es disclosure. there Therefore, ntier-lri ng reason to w ith ho l d ��r l as o f the right to n rlvan; v the 1i== lrs_+ e general prlir> of ' naccordance with the PRA should to adhered to. "r - nse„d Organizational St ruct_r e /Activities -------------------------------------------- Is P- rr _Ced_ membership in e _A group will ±_ residing wi Ff y r e limited tc, legitimate i n t E. r c _• t 1 and/or parsons with group's + n tetra city, iG. 5 ~,t_i_1na , ties the i will be mOn i tOred and The ,-, r -c-, department directed t,Y lTtf= tTibF't- of ' and be 9r e _ ned by BMW of Directors t that will be chosen T within he group, Thereaftterms - - _i er tr- = will T • f iE: r + membership. he general Membership and acceptance will require t lct -?mPlet r - r`r= n- _ l -i_ _r- ; all applicants packave and Page 10 LEAP Staff Report pass a background examination by Sheriff's staff, The Sheriff's staff member will have ultimate right of approval of membership based on the above. Council was previously provided a draft copy of the proposed LEAP Manual. Still in draft form, this manual must again be revised to comply with the recommendations and direction of County Counsel. Once approved by Sheriff's staff, non- compliance with the rules and regulations of the LEAP Manual will be cauSe for dismissal from the group. The group's activities are intended to be a mobile citizen's patrol that will communicate with portable radios to a base station manned by a member of the group. Suspicious activity or Unlawful behavior observed will be reported to the Sheriff's Department via the base station. All members will be required to remain passive in their activities and avoid confrontation pending the arrival of a uniformed officer. The purpose of this citizen patrol group is to deter- thefts, vandalism. graffiti or- other unlawful activities. In conjunction with the Sheriff's disaster preparedness plans for the Cities of Moorpark and Thousand Oaks, the County's Office of Emergency Services (OES) recommends that cities form Disaster Assistance Response Teams (DART) for use during emergencies or natural disasters. If approved for sponsorship, the LEAP group could serve as the core group for the City's DART group as well. The DART group's activities are very similar to the Disaster Assistance Team (DAT) being established in the city by the Red Crass. The `i _, Of Camarillo has recently organized =a DART group. ip. initigl training r"'eq!_!,i - -- _r- F- �m�= '�'tr_ ir-tr- 1_'rir= �_r =!F' r ?r- n!_ip are proposed to be 16 hours and include; Basic Law. Laws of Arrest, patrol Procedures/Observation, Crime s T__ rF; +rtF =• Pr- C;tF?rt._rir! (,ni!,rtroOfT! Demeanor, Ha._aroou , at. e r _ i a i = Awareness w ✓n e� - t1 gangs. Additio a11y, all members w _]i be required to b - first _1 C and CPR i An - i c pated DART training, , baased on DES recommendations -eco me d - include Awareness, Shelter �'=:n"Qement, Damage Assessment, - Control, tC__it.i;_;nc Medical, Disaster Psycholua,, 1 h - 5earch and Rescue Command 1 provided and th,- incident System, , . . ) _ i 1 ! be by local Providers in the county and/or khn-ift,E staff. Page 11 LEAP Staff Report Program Costs _____________ Coordination of the proposed program will be the responsibility of the Community Services Officer (CSO) because it will be part of the City's crime prevention programs. Initially, considerable staff time will be involved in the organization of the group. Personnel files will be maintained by the Sheriff's Personnel Bureau however the CSO, Sergeant and Police Clerk will spend a significant amount of time establishing these files. LEAP applicants will be required to complete an extensive personal history questionnaire that will serve as the basis for a background examination to determine applicant acceptably. Cost Breakdown Background examinations * $10,205.00 Annual staff cost to monitor program 95950'00 Equipment Purchase * 4,500.00 Annual equipment maintenance/supplies 500.00 1 * One time start-up costs b, 55.00 Staff estimates that each applicant background 'will require eight hours of staff time. Assuming that approximately 40 citizens apply for membership creation of these personnel files will require approximately 320 hours. Using an hourly overtime rate of $31.89 for the CSO, potentially $10,205.00 may be expended. Staff expects to limit this overtime expenditure by condurting the majority of this workload durinq no,mal won hours. As prebiously reported, staff estimates that 4-8 hours of the "O's time per week will be required to monitor and evaluate the group's activities. Coupled with his currently expanoing Neighborhood Watch activities and establishmaFt Of a Cr me Stoppers group in the city, the demands of this oropw may excessive and require an overol.^n expondiLure. vte�^ a potential on-going overtime expenditure of MWW00 based on six hours per week and an nourly overtime rate of ���9. Should Cuonci1 authorize rhe W.ce geparLment t- nrg,nizc ,.e grouo, staff expects that it can absort any reQUirec overtime expenditure to monitor the prugram this Tisca| V W Or Wit 4in current appropriations' Suuseque"t on-qoing costs wil) req-ire an additional budget appropriatu^.. = Page 12 LEAF Staff Report Equipment costs will be approximately $4,500.00 for the purchase of six UHF model portable radios, carrying cases and five portable lamps. Staff has received price information of $500.00 each for portable radios compatible with these currently in use by city staff. Equipment carrying cases and the portable lamps are $97.00 and $130.00 each respectively. Staff has the option to downgrade to Citizen Band type radios however- the equipment would not remain compatible with existing city equipment if the group later disbanded. Cost of downgraded radio equipment would be approximately $900.00. Staff estimates on -g J1 nq annual maintenance and supply needs at $500,00. Although the group is exploring various options for the acquisition of this equipment it has not been able to acquire equipment to date. Neither the Sheriff's Department or the police department currently have sufficient appropriations for this unanticipated equipment expenditure . SUMMARY The Sheriff currently sponsors citizen patrol groups in Ojai and Camarillo. The proposed activities of the LEAP group will be consistent with the activities of those two groups with the potential addition of disaster preparedness response activities. As the result of County Counsel's opinion in the area of liability the Sheriff would assume vicarious liability for the activities and/or omissions of the LEAP group. If the Council desired the Sheriff to organize aqd oversee hi_ citizen nrouo at 'Tall -t be a joint sponsorship between the City and Sheriff's Department/Moorpark Police Department. The the mitigate = h eriff' s Department , -- l take necessary ste p s t , r_tig ts it_ liability by conducting background examinations of all program applicants and provide the required formal training identified �; � d earlier in this report.- in light the Sheriff's Dpaartments newil defined liability the Department must confer with (_:o!_nty Risk Management ma! n identifying � war of fr_ my Counsel ' s r71r io and t r-oce es to be undertaken to mitigate potential liability. "n" stalt overtime incurred this fiscal jen- will De absorbed within _._sting appropriation= however potential overtime expenditure ofapproximately $9,9O0.00 and on-qoing equipment rr,.:_t of $5 ,sear e- ��._,,)f_., ;..iii wi 11 hf? i(�(_il.rr -_r', r-!r�:.Ci= i 15 =a.1 fln__ i.=1mf=' equipment purchase __r ;_.s_:r :l,nd background overtime rr_••= +._s will be aPPrOxImately $4,500,00 and Page 14 LEAP Staff Report The organization of this gro!. contribution to the city's police the Honorable City Council, th monitor closely the activities of t :pith established rules and r-eg�_! sponsorship of the group it it is City and Sheriff's Department, Pre Pared red to proceed {�_.. p .d �yi tli �_�r��a.��i_nq RECOMMENDATION Direct staff as deemed appropriate= mleap !p may make a significant services. If authorized by e Sheriff's Department will _he group to ensure compliance lations and will terminate in the best interest of the The Sheriff's Department is this citizen patrol group, BERNARDO M. PEREZ Mayor SCOTT MONTGOMERY Mayor Pro Tem ELOISE BROWN Councilmember CLINT HARPER, Ph.D. Councilmember PAUL W. LAWRASON, Jr. Councilmember LILLIAN KELLERMAN City Clerk TO: FROM: DATE: MOORPARK THE HONORABLE CIW,IEUTENANT CIL RICHARD RODRIGUE FEBRUARY 8, 1991 STEVEN KUENY City Manager CHERYL J. KANE City Attorney PATRICK RICHARDS, A.I.C.P. Director of Community Development R. DENNIS DELZEIT City Engineer JOHN V. GILLESPIE Chief of Police RICHARD T. HARE City Treasurer SUBJECT: MOORPARK LAW ENFORCEMENT ASSISTANCE PROGRAM (LEAP) BACKGROUND As originally proposed, Moorpark -s citizen patrol group members would actively patrol their immediate neighborhoods and report suspicious activity /crimes they observed to the police. The group proposed that the identity of its membership, would not be made public knowledge to ease apprehensions of retaliation and allow the group to work more effectively. The group stated that their desire was to work in partnership with the Police department. The police de p artment clearly stated initially that as proposed the group would be acting as private citizens with no police sanction of affiliation. If the group desired to organize under the auspices of the Sheriff's Department, specific liability issues had to be examined and resolved to the Department -s satisfaction. At the regularly scheduled City Council meeting on February 6, 1991, the Honorable City Council directed staff to provide a definitive response on whether the Sheriff's Department �N70uld organize and supervise Moorparh's proposed citizen patrol group ,LEAP). and accept, the asSoc_atec liabili ty. DISCUSSION At Council -s direction staff has spent considerable time in attempting to determine whether a citizen patrol group, as origina-lly proposed, was a workable proposal. Staff recommended that Locus of the proposed group be broadened to general crime 799 Moorpark Avenue Moorpark, California 93021 (805) 529 -6864 41 Page 2 LEAP Program Prevention rather than merely graffiti. Staff also identified a myriad of issues, both legal and operational, of concern to both the City and Sheriff's Department that required study. Legal opinion was received from the Ventura County Counsel's Office and was provided to Council at its February 6, 1991, meeting. At the core of County Counsel's Opinion was the finding that as Proposed, this volunteer group's members would be considered employees of the Sheriff's Department and all associated. liabilities would be borne primarily by the County. Staff has studied the issues that were identified as potential areas of liability and how best to mitigate the potential vicarious liability that would impact both the County and City through sponsorship of this group. Issues included workman's compensation, an employee - employer relationship, rules and regulations, training, background investigations, control and cost. Control and cost considerations were particularly important because the police department does not presently have sufficient staffing to organize the group, conduct background investigations, train, monitor and evaluate the groups activities without incurring significant expenditures of overtime, both through the current and succeeding fiscal years. Potential costs for this fiscal year were previously provided to Council. Staff has discussed this proposed program in detail with the Sheriff's Department's Command Staff. The Sheriff's Department has the expertise however does not currently have the ability to assist Moorpark's contract staff with the proposed group's background investigations and training needs. As such, Moorpark's police staffing will be required to conduct all work necessary to make this program operational and will incur a significant overtime expenditure. The overtime expenditure will further impact police appropriations that have recently been impacted by new contract service rates and booking fees. The identified vicarious liability that will result from the proposed group's actions or omissions is the most significant issue that staff has been unable to resolve_ Sta=gy does not feel that the proposed group's activities can be properly monitored and controlled to mitigate this liability. The Sheriff -s Department is therefore unable to organize and oversee the activities of the proposed group and recommend to Ventura County Risk Management that the County of Ventura accept the accompanying liability_ The Moorpark Police Department has a very well established community -wide Crime Prevention Program highlighted by D.A_R.E. Page 3 LEAP Program and the Neighborhood Watch. Staff has expanded Neighborhood Watch with the organization of six new groups since September. In addition, the police department is currently organizing a Crime Stoppers Program in the City. Crime Stoppers is a national crime prevention program that allows citizens to anonymously report criminal or suspicious activity without fear of identity or retaliation. The program offers cash incentive rewards for information received via telephone tips. Once- organized, the program will be self- supporting through solicitations and donations from within the community_ The program has been in existence in Thousand Oaks for approximately four years and has been responsible for solving a significant number of crimes since its inception. Law enforcement requires citizen involvement and support to effectively police and ensure public safety in the community_ This type of citizen involvement has served as the foundation for the City's crime prevention programs. The police department will continue to encourage citizen participation in making Moorpark a safe community and hopes that the community will support the new Crime Stoppers Program as it has D.A_R.E. and Neighborhood Watch. The proposed citizen patrol group is not prevented from organizing as private citizens to report crime as originally Proposed. Their Calls For Service will be accepted and responded to in the same manner as other citizen's requests. RECOMMENDATION The Sheriff-s' Department is unable to organize and supervise the activities of the proposed group and accept the accompanying liability. Staff recommends that the program not be sponsored. lleap B 06 '91 10 :55 VTA CO SIERRIFF'S P.3 County of Ventura SHERIFF'S DEPARTIUM V jis s ] k_ ij 1Y To: -Frank Mancino, Code Enforcement From: Marty house, Sgt. Subject: Citation Procedures r, Date: January 31, 1991 I contacted Thousand Oaks code Enforcement to inquire as to their Citation and arrest procedures. I was told that they never- physically take anyone into custody and that they have no more authority than any other citizen to. make arrests. As a rule they do not request the Sheriff's Department to- take action on their behalf without a warrent issued by the court. They, no longer cite for misdemeanors out in the field, instead, all misdemeanors are referred to the City Attorney who files all misdemeanor violations with the court. There are -a couple of reasons why.the City Attorney prefers to handle all misdemeanors.- I. This gives the City Attorney the opportunity to review anything that could possibly result in sdme type of litigation. 2. Apparently the court went to a new computer system that only allows for the entry of code enforcement citations as infractions. All infraction violations are issued in the field. If there is a situation where a citizen refuses to sign a citation, the Code Enforcement Officer documents the incident and refers the matter to the City Attorney for prosecution. The City of Thousand Oaks has a Municipal Code section that designates it a misdemeanor to refuse to sign a Code Enforcement citation (section 1- 5.09). Thousand Oaks Code Enforcement officers rarely call for Sheriff's Department assistance since the city has taken the position that they want their officers to avoid Confrontations. The general exception is if an officer is assaulted in some way. I have attached a listing of T.O.M.C. sections which I have attached for your review. I will try to get you a copy of the citations they use. 1 FEB 06 '91 10:55 VTA CO SHERRIFF °S 1- 4:04- 1 -S.04 requests and set the utter at dte earnest reasonable- and available date, which shall be within at least ninety (90) days of the &ling. The City Cleric shall cause a written notice of the heating to be given to the appellant, applicant and City official or departruent whose decision is appealed, not less than ten (10) days prior to such hearing, unless such notice; is waived in writing by the applicant and appellant. ( § i, Ord. 921 -NS, eft May 20, 1986) Sea 1 -4.04. Hearings. At such hearing the appellant shall show cause on the grounds specified in the notice of appeal why the action appealed from should not be approved. The Council may continue the hearing from time to time. and its findings on the appeal shall be final and conclusive in the matter: Sec. 1.4.05. Time tieaaitatlons for jtedicsal reviews of City decisionL Any court action or proceedings to attack, review, set aside. void, annul, or seek damages for any final City decision on a permit. license, other City entitlement or any decision or action taken pursuant to Title 9 of this code, or referred to in Sec. 1-4.01 of this chapter shall be commenced and the service of summons; effected within ninety (90) days after the effective date of such decision or action taken or if a shorter period of time is prescribed in state law or elsewhe6 in this code, such shorter Period shall prevail. In malcing the final decision, the Mayor or chairperson of the meeting shall notify the parties in attendance that the time within which judicial review must be sought is govcrncd by Section 1094.6 and parallel Provisions of state law_ Thereafter, all persons are barred from commencing or prowcututg any such action or proceeding or asserting any defense of invalidity or uzuzasonableness of such decision. proceeding. determination, or action taken. The time provision of Code of Civil Procedure Section 1094.6 is also made applicable by this (Thoux4} .d Oak, e- jo -g6) lu P.4 The time provisiont of Coda of Civil Procedure Section 1094.6 is also made applicable by this section. This section shall not expand the scope of judicial review Aid shall prevail over any con flicting provision and any otherwise applicable law relating to the subject.matter except to the extent that shorter time periods well prevail as provided above. Q 1. Ord. 705-NS. eff. March 29. 1979, as amended by J 4. One. 907 NS, eff. February 11, 1986) CHAI!M S. CITATION PROCE URE , Sec. I.S.01. Scalw All viol:tiom of any provisions of the laws of the City and of this Code shall be subject to the citation procedures set forth in this chapter. Q 1. Ord. 104, as amended by § II, Ord, 770 - NS, eM February 26, 1981) Sec. I -SAZ Notices to app en: Foam. .If any person is arnsted for the violation of any psovidon of the Ims of the City or of this Code. and such person is not immq ately taken before a magistrate, the azxsdng officer shall PmPare. in duplicate, a written notice to appear in court. Such notice shall contain the name and address of such person. the offense charged, and the time when and piece where such person shall appear in court 0 2, Ord. 104) Sec. I -S.03. Notion to appear: 7-me. The time spedAed in the notice to appear shall be at least tea (10) days after such arrest. (§ 3, Ord. 104, as amended by § S. Ord_ 907 -NS, eff. February 11, 1986). Sec. I -5.04. Notices to appear: Place. The place specified in the notice to appear shall be: (a) The court of the magistrate before whom the person would be taken if the require- ment of arresting and taking the person before a magistrate were complied with: or lA FEB 06 '91 10: S6 VTA CO SHERRIFF°S (b) Before as Of&W WAthadzed by such court to rt.eehe a deposit os bait. (f 4.Otd.104) Sect -S.OS. NGdM to appear: Penmiee and The enforcement officar shall deliver one copy of the Notice to Appear to the detained or arrested person. The arrested parson, in order to secure release, -shall gee his written proadse to so appear in court by signing a duplicate notice wbich sbal2 be retaumd by the officer. The officer may book the armstee or release the person arrested froru custody- Any person ref Lling to signs the Notice to Appear may be taken into custody. 0 5, Ord. 104, as amended by 3 6, Ord. 907 -NS, eft: February 11, 1986) Sec. 1 -S.06. Warcum for arrest. When a person signs a wntten promise to appear at the time and place specified in the written promise to appear and has not posted bad as. prorided in -the Penal Code Of this Stec, the ruagisthtte shat! isms and have delivered for execution a warrant for such person's arrest within twenty (20) days after his fafurc to appear as promised, or if such person Promises to appear before -an officer authorized to accept bail, other than a magistrate and fails to do so on or before the date which sucdt PMOn promised to appear, within twenty (20) days after the delivery of suds wdtt= promise to appear by the officer to a msg}strste having Juri3diction over the-ofycrtsr. Q 7, Ord.. 104, as amended by 17, Ora. W-NS, eff. February 1 t, tW.) Sec. 1- 5.07. Vichdow of promb" to Any Parson witfulty violating his written promise to aPPaar in court shall be 9Qty of a misdemeanor regardless of tho d.ispo4tion of the charge upon which he was origb1ally arrested. ($ 8. Ord. 104) In P. S 1-5-OS— 1-6.01 Sea I-SA8. F.ufo t. For the puipose of enforcing the Provisions of this code, the wowing are designated as "enforcement officers": (e) The Disector of Planing and Com- munity Development; (b) The Zoning/Code Enforcensent Off oea; (c) The Director of Building and Safety; (d) The City Engineer; (e) The Business Lic=w Inspector; (f) The Director of iltdities; (g) The Chief of Police; (h) The Fare Chief; (0 The Health Officer; and ) Cor4o, Open Space Conservation Agency (COSCA) Rangers. 0 6, Ord. 104, as M=ded by Ord. 183, $ 1, Ord. 106-NS, eff- September 5, 1%9, § 8, Ord. 907-M, eft February 11, 1986, and If 1, 2, Ord. 962 -NS, efL bray 19, 1987) Sec. 1-5.01 ii:aOR C I I I I t oMo 11 - Detlar, It Shall be the duty of the enforcement offbvtrs to enforce the provisions of this code and they shall have the power to issue citations. 10'44 vr" Any pMM who resists, delays. obstructs. r,0 vs j''' thmatma or attempts to intimidate the of'f`rctr AB+� , in the discharge of, or attempted disc}uargc of. his duty shall be gafity of-a snssdemesrto ter` :u:* include the refusal to sign a citation or written promiss to apps 0 9, Ord. 907 -NS, eff. February 11, 1986) CIiA"ER 6. PUBLIC NUISANCES Sac. i -6.01. Oe<tmtioa of what conadtat" it palsiic a In addition to any outer provisions of this Code, each of the following conditions or arts are dtclarod to be a public nuissnec: (Th.ou&&*d Oats 6 -3o47)