Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAbout2010/11/16-Minutes-Crime Control and Prevention District (CCPD)CITY OF FORT WORTH CRIME CONTROL AND PREVENTION DISTRICT BOARD OF DIRECTORS REGULAR MEETING NOVEMBER 16, 2010 Present: President Mike Moncrief Vice President W. B. "Zim" Zimmerman (arrived at 2:10 p.m.) Director Salvador Espino (arrived at 2:08 p.m.) Director Danny Scarth (arrived at 2:08 p.m.) Director Frank Moss Director Jungus Jordan Director Carter Burdette Director Kathleen Hicks Director Joel Burns City Staff: Charles Daniels, Assistant City Manager Charlene Sanders, Assistant City Attorney Marty Hendrix, Secretary to the Board Jeff Halstead, Police Chief Tom Hughes, Sergeant, Police Department Shallah Graham, Senior Administrative Services Manager, Police Department Monique Moore, Director of Administrative Services, Police Department Other City Staff in Attendance: Rhonda Robertson, Executive Deputy Chief, Police Department Charlie Ramirez, Deputy Chief, Police Department Christy Rodriguez, Senior Planner, Police Department Richard Zavala, Director of Parks and Community Services Lena Ellis, Finance Director and CFO Other Police Department personnel With a quorum of the board members present, President Mike Moncrief called the meeting of the Crime Control and Prevention District Board of Directors to order at 2:07 p.m., on Tuesday, November 19, 2010, in the Pre - Council Chamber of the Fort Worth Municipal Building, 1000 Throckmorton Street, Fort Worth, Texas 76102. Approval of Minutes of the August 24, 2010, CCPD Board Meeting (Agenda Item II) President Moncrief opened the floor for a motion on the approval of the minutes. CITY OF FORT WORTH CRIME CONTROL AND PREVENTION DISTRICT BOARD NOVEMBER 16, 2010 Page 2 of 18 Approval of Minutes of the August 24, 2010, CCPD Board Meeting (cont'd) (Agenda Item II) MOTION: Upon a motion made by Director Hicks and seconded by Director Moss, the board members voted six (6) and zero (0) "nays ", with Directors Scarth, Espino and Zimmerman, temporarily absent, to approve the minutes of the August 24, 2010, Crime Control and Prevention District Board of Directors meeting. The motion carried unanimously. (Directors Scarth, Espino and Zimmerman arrived at the meeting.) Written Reports (Agenda Item III) President Moncrief advised the following written reports had been provided to the directors. He opened the floor for questions and /or comments. A. Proposed Meeting Dates for FYI I B. Update on the new police facility at Lancaster and IH35 C. Use of CCPD funds to address crime prevention in targeted areas. D. FY 2009 -2010 4th Quarter Program Report These reports were received as a matter of information. There was no formal action taken by the directors on this agenda item. Staff Reports: Glock Gun Transition (Agenda Item IV -A) Sergeant Tom Hughes, Fort Worth Police Department spoke before the directors regarding the transition from police- issued weapon of Sig Sauer P226 to the Glock 22. Using a PowerPoint presentation, he provided an overview on this transition. He advised that there had been previous discussions with Police Chief Halstead about cost saving measures and one of the issues raised was that of changing the police- issued hand gun from the Sig Sauer P226 to the Glock 22 but still maintaining the quality, safety and training for the police officers. He advised: ■ Funds would be saved by changing the recruit issue handgun from the SIG SAUER P226 to the GLOCK 22 ■ A decrease in expenditures for training and Armorer Certifications ■ Raise efficiency by lowering the amount of time required to detail inspect firearms CITY OF FORT WORTH CRIME CONTROL AND PREVENTION DISTRICT BOARD NOVEMBER 16, 2010 Page 3 of 18 Staff Reports: Glock Gun Transition (cont'd) (Agenda Item IV -A) He explained the difficulty of taking apart the Sig Sauer P226 weapon for Armorer Certifications and that they would experience less time in taking apart the Glock 22 and also this gun was not as costly to maintain. Sergeant Hughes showed slides comparing the guns and explained the differences as follows: SIG SAUER P226R GLOCK 17/22 Exposed Hammer Internal Striker Fired Metal Slide and Frame Polymer Frame and Steel Slide Safeties Safeties He advised that the cost savings was realized in the polymer frame of the Glock. Sergeant Hughes presented a slide showing the comparison of weapons ammunition capacity as follows: SIG P226R - .40 CALIBER 12 Rounds 37 On the belt SIG P226R - 9mm 15 Rounds 46 On the belt GLOCK 22 -.40 CALIBER 15 Rounds 46 On the belt GLOCK 17 - 9mm 17 Rounds 51 On the belt Sergeant Hughes then presented a slide of the cost comparison for these weapons as follows: P226R - $585 GLOCK 22 - $434 Trijicon night sites Trijicon night sites 3 magazines 3 magazines Level III Holster - $96.02 Level III Holster - $96.02 Magazine Pouch - $20.83 Magazine Pouch - $20.83 He pointed out that there was a $151.00 difference per officer. Sergeant Hughes reviewed a slide showing training for the Glock as follows: CITY OF FORT WORTH CRIME CONTROL AND PREVENTION DISTRICT BOARD NOVEMBER 16, 2010 Page 4 of 18 Staff Reports: Glock Gun Transition (cont'd) • Recruit Training - Same basic course as the Sig Sauer - Same standards to pass qualification • (Score of 85) • In Service Training - Four hour block for transition training - Same qualification standard • (Score of 85) He spoke about the Armorer Certification as follows: SIG SAUER Certification requires renewal every three years 2 day /16 hour School $395 per student plus travel GLOCK Certification requires renewal every three years 1 day /8 hour School $150 per student plus travel Sergeant Hughes discussed the cost to transition as follows: (Agenda Item IV -A) • 1391 officers currently carry the Sig Sauer Classic (P220, P226, P228 and P229) for a uniform weapon • 48 officers carry a Glock • Transition 68 officers carrying Smith and Wesson or Beretta to Glock • Transition ten instructors to Glock Sergeant Hughes concluded his presentation with the following comments: • Glock and Sig Sauer are excellent firearms and perform the same function • Purchasing the Glock for future issue will be a significant savings over the current Sig Sauer P226R ($6,040.00 per recruit class of 40) • Two Glocks can be detail inspected in the same time period as one Sig Sauer • Glock has less parts to wear and replace • Seventy five percent of Glock parts are interchangeable He presented a transition plan that would commence in 2012 as follows: CITY OF FORT WORTH CRIME CONTROL AND PREVENTION DISTRICT BOARD NOVEMBER 16, 2010 Page 5 of 18 Staff Reports: Glock Gun Transition (cont'd) (Agenda Item IV -A) • Change the issue weapon from Sig Sauer P226R to Glock G22 and take advantage of the savings when the supply of Sig Sauer's is exhausted • Limit the primary weapons that all officers carry to the Sig Sauer and Glock • Keep the Sig Sauer pistols in service until officers currently utilizing them retire Sergeant Hughes summarized his presentation as follows: • The cost savings will be significant for each recruit class • Range operations will be streamlined and more efficient • Limit the types of duty weapons in service Sergeant Hughes completed his presentation. President Moncrief opened the floor for questions and /or comments. President Moncrief requested clarification on the weight of the Glock, with the polymer frame and if it was lighter to carry than the other gun or if the additional capacity in the magazine made it the same weight or heavier. Sergeant Hughes indicated that despite having the capacity for additional ammunition in the magazine, the Glock did weight less than the other gun. He added that it has a very good balance. He pointed out that it was easier for the police officers to get in and out of their vehicles and it was less strain on their backs. President Moncrief also requested clarification on the retail costs of both weapons. Sergeant Hughes stated that the retail cost for the Glock 22 was $460.00, with the law enforcement price at $398.00 and with night sites at $434.00. He pointed out that the Sig Sauer would cost in the $700.00 to $800.00 range. President Moncrief requested clarification as to whether this transition would place the Fort Worth Police Department more in sync with what other large cities departments were doing. Sergeant Hughes indicated that about 70% of the police departments were either carrying the Glocks or permitting their officers to purchase the Glock as their service weapon. He referenced the larger cities of Arlington, San Antonio and New York City. He reiterated that it put the City of Fort Worth very much in line with what other cities were doing. He did emphasize that the Sig Sauer was a good weapon that was utilized by a lot of cities in the country. (Director Hicks left the meeting at 2:18 p.m.) CITY OF FORT WORTH CRIME CONTROL AND PREVENTION DISTRICT BOARD NOVEMBER 16, 2010 Page 6 of 18 Staff Reports: Glock Gun Transition (cont'd) (Agenda Item IV -A) President Moncrief also requested clarification if there was an issue with the accidental discharge of the Glock and whether that was something that he had heard or read about. Sergeant Hughes clarified that the terminology between "accidental" discharge and "negligent" discharge. He pointed out that if an officer pulled the trigger and there was a round in the chamber, the gun would fire the bullet. He further explained that if the weapon was cleared before it was taken down to clean, there would not be a negligent discharge. President Moncrief indicated that he felt this was an appropriate move for the City's Police Department. He added that he felt that the police officers needed the best training in the business and also needed the best weaponry. He added that it gives a little bit of comfort to the officers that spend so much time on the streets to have a little bit less to carry around and at the same time have more capacity and it made a lot of sense as well. The presentation and discussion was concluded on this agenda item. At this time, President Moncrief recognized Assistant City Manager Charles Daniels for some brief announcements. Assistant City Manager Daniels stated that this past Saturday the HELO Deaf and Hard of Hearing Crime Fair was held and from all indications it was a very large success for the community. He advised that Class 127 was now in progress. He stated that they began classes on November 1, 2010. He stated that the Blue Christmas Detail would begin their work on November 26, 2010. Mr. Daniels advised that in coordination with the electronic City Council agenda packets, the City staff would also be providing the CCPD Board with electronic agenda packets in the future and hopefully before their next meeting. Staff Reports: Five Year Period Needs (Agenda Item IV -B) Police Chief Jeff Halstead spoke before the directors on the Police Department's five - year period needs. He expressed appreciation to the directors for past conversations that have been held regarding the Police Department's needs for the next five years and being able to met the goals of their five -year plan. Chief Halstead referenced a handout that had been provided to the directors at their last meeting. He indicated that he wanted to provide some of the presentation on this item so that there could be some good dialogue about the problems that they would face, especially with the challenging economical situation that existed. He indicated that he wanted to be able to respond to questions that may be raised by the directors. Using a PowerPoint presentation, Chief Halstead referenced the handout that had been provided to the directors at their last meeting. He presented their research findings which were CITY OF FORT WORTH CRIME CONTROL AND PREVENTION DISTRICT BOARD NOVEMBER 16, 2010 Page 7 of 18 Staff Reports: Five Year Period Needs (cont'd) (Agenda Item IV -B) that the City of Fort Worth had experienced a 24.7% increase in population since 2003. He added the North Central Texas Council of Governments projected that over the next five years, the City will experience another 13 %. Chief Halstead presented a chart was showing the population increase from 2003 up to the projected population for the year 2015. He indicated that in conversations with the citizens, they were expressing their concerns for how the City was going to meet all of the service demands for the growing population and particularly the professional police services. Chief Halstead spoke about the factors that were taken into account when assessing how many calls the police officers could make and it assisted the City and the Patrol Division when they had the patrol reorganization on July 31, 2010. He pointed out that process was still in progress because after six months of that decision, they were going back with a smaller focus group of just patrol officers and supervisors and make minor adjustments to make it even better. He pointed out just looking at their dispatch calls for service since 2003, it had increased 16.4 %. He added that there was a trend that he had noticed going to major cities Police Chiefs' Meetings, especially with the International Association of Chiefs of Police, and the Executive Police Research Forum. He stated that they were trying to classify certain types of calls that certain cities were basically just not dispatching calls for service. He indicated that was a challenge for every city, because the Police Department was here to provide a service and when the citizens made a call, they expected service. Chief Halstead indicated that they would have to weight carefully on what calls that they say they would go on and what calls they say they would not go on because there was a lot of public safety issues that generate on those calls of concern. He reiterated that the trend of other major cities was basically just eliminating certain calls. He felt the key determining factor in this process was not following a trend of another city. He reiterated that he felt they had a unique relationship here with the community and that the department needed to respect that. Chief Halstead stated that they looked at all of the ways the calls increased. He stated that they utilized a patrol allocation model to assess the number of police officers and patrol. He stated as the number of calls increased, it was likely expected that either response times were going to increase and /or they would have to start investing in more personnel. He added that what they have seen since July 31S`was that the Patrol Division reorganization decreased in their response time. He added that it was not significant; however, many other areas were seeing a faster response. Chief Halstead indicated that they were seeing a lot of challenges such as in the far north part of Fort Worth where they were finding that infrastructure was not there thus there were complications with getting to certain calls; therefore, some response times are increasing. CITY OF FORT WORTH CRIME CONTROL AND PREVENTION DISTRICT BOARD NOVEMBER 16, 2010 Page 8 of 18 Staff Reports: Five Year Period Needs (cont'd) (Agenda Item IV -B) He stated that they were addressing all of that totality with the focus group that they were going to put together. Chief Halstead stated that basically they wanted to say that they utilized the patrol allocation model for the forecasting by population and the calls for service and they have a specific number. Chief Halstead stated that he believed two meetings ago the directors wanted to know an expectation of a number that the Police Department wanted to add to the Police Department so that they could effectively serve the future population of Fort Worth. Chief Halstead pointed out that the number was 170. He advised that this was not a final number. He pointed out that the next few slides that he was going to review would explain the particulars about that number. He stated that adding the 170 police officers would serve the future needs not only in the Patrol Division but now they would add the other resources that they needed. He pointed out that the number would not include the numbers of those supplementary details that supported their Patrol Divisions so there would be very small increases in other areas, i.e., supervisors, specialty units, SWAT Team, Canine Unit, etc. Chief Halstead presented a chart that showed just a comparison of where they were with staffing as shown at the pink line of information and the projections that sat on the blue line on the chart. He pointed out that the directors could see where the 170 officers would come into play. He stated adding the other numbers that they needed to talk about was very important. Chief Halstead stated that most importantly when they served the citizens, they get out there and take the calls for service and then that report went to an assigned detective for follow - up and potential prosecution. He stated that he was very happy that in 2007/2008 there were 25 detectives that were adding to the investigative mission of the Police Department. He stated this action reduced the number from 858 to 677 reports per detective. He added however that when they looked at the five -year future staffing trends, he explained that they could not neglect their investigative detail, especially if they were going to consistently see the growth in dispatch calls for service, along with their population trends as well. Chief Halstead then showed a graph of the number of offense reports currently and at the five -year projection. He stated that the directors could see that there was an increase as expected. CITY OF FORT WORTH CRIME CONTROL AND PREVENTION DISTRICT BOARD NOVEMBER 16, 2010 Page 9 of 18 Staff Reports: Five Year Period Needs (cont'd) (Agenda Item IV -B) Chief Halstead then presented the summary for the positions for the two basic services of the Police Department that were responding to calls for service and investigating the crimes that those calls for service generated for the next five (5) years as: - 170 patrol officers - 10 detectives - 17 sergeants (supervisory positions) - 197 total Chief Halstead stated that this information did not include growth in the specialized units that support patrol and in the number of command staff positions which would need to occur. He added that the specialized units needed to be grown very carefully in order to meet the service expectations of the residents. Chief Halstead concluded his presentation. President Moncrief opened the floor or questions and /or comments. He advised that it was helpful information in order to get a snapshot of where they have been, where they were currently and where they were trying to go. He stated as Chief Halstead had pointed out with the first graph, the City of Fort Worth was going to continue to grow. He pointed out that this started around 2004 and it had not stopped, nor was the growth going to stop. He stated that this was only going to increase the number of dispatch calls that the Police Department was going to receive. He added that he felt that the Police Department was going to have to make some tough calls at least until the Police Department could get the resources that they needed. He felt that they needed to be careful in the delineation of what those calls were going to be and to make it clear to the citizens why the Police Department was making those kind of tough decisions. He added it was also incumbent upon the directors not only as the Board of CCPD but also wearing the City Council hats to make sure that the Police Department had the resources to do the job that they were expected to do. He added that he was comfortable that the City Council "got it" and that they knew that the Police Department had to have not only the troops in the field but there had to be the supervision to be able to carry forward a good department with a good product for the people who live in this City. (Director Scarth left the meeting at 2:30 p.m.) Director Jordan commended the Police Chief on his approach. He advised that the City found itself in peaks and valleys as the recession went up and down and the City's budgets went up and down. He stated that they had to be very careful as they added additional officers that they did this over a period of time so that as they managed attrition in the police groups that the CITY OF FORT WORTH CRIME CONTROL AND PREVENTION DISTRICT BOARD NOVEMBER 16, 2010 Page 10 of 18 Staff Reports: Five Year Period Needs (cont'd) (Agenda Item IV -B) City did not find itself where it was five to ten years ago. He pointed out that 20% of the force could have retired. He stated that this could speak to the other issue, which was the pension fund. He stated that he was happy to see the professional management of the force in a five -year management structure. Chief Halstead stated that he had to give credit to the staff in their research and planning division that give the quality intelligence and product that could be presented to the directors He indicated that they did a quality job to give the accurate information that leads them to the future. Board Member Burdette indicated that the good news that he saw in the report was that the need for the additional officers was due to the population growth and not by crimes per 100 citizens, which had been seen in the City before. He pointed out that the crime statistics was coming down which meant that the City had a better and more efficient Police Department, but certainly the City needed to keep up with the population growth and accomplish it on a timely basis. President Moncrief requested that Chief Halstead return to the slide showing the population growth and indicated that the City Council needed to keep that in mind as it was going to be before the Council for consideration sooner not later. He pointed out that it was almost 200 new positions and the City Council needed to remember this when starting up the budget process. Board Member Jordan stated that what he had seen any time they had seen a crime was an arrest of the culprits. He emphasized that upon adding those 25 detectives would be contributing to the factor that the Police Department was catching the bad guys and gals. Police Chief Halstead responded that he still had to lean on the community regarding the communication and trust within the department and the community because they could feel comfortable in giving the Police Department what they felt was sensitive information and /or tips on information and leads. He added that as the City Council spoke with their peers across the nation some of them have adopted a flat percentage model of 2.5 officers per 100,000. He added that he did not know if that was an appropriate way. He provided as an example the City of San Jose, California, who was working off of a 1.2 model and then he referenced other cities that had a 4.4 model. He indicated that he did not like to go with a flat line number. He indicated that he wanted to see what the residents wanted to see in the City and then what that service expectation would be in the future. He indicated that methodology made it a customized product for the City. CITY OF FORT WORTH CRIME CONTROL AND PREVENTION DISTRICT BOARD NOVEMBER 16, 2010 Page 11 of 18 Staff Reports: Five Year Period Needs (cont'd) (Agenda Item IV -B) President Moncrief commended Chief Halstead on his presentation. This concluded the presentation and discussion on this agenda item. Action Item: Overview and Approval of Amendments to the CCPD Financial Policy (Agenda Item V -A) Shallah Graham, Senior Administrative Services Manager, Police Department, spoke before the directors on the amendments to the CCPD Financial Policy. Using a PowerPoint presentation, she provided the following information. She reminded the directors that at their meeting in August, they were given a presentation on the different processes that the City staff had gone through to determine the fund balance and they were walked through the Fund Balance Policy that the board amended. She identified the following processes were: Determining a Fund Balance - Benchmarking - City Fund Balances - CCPD Fund Balance - Predictability and Diversity of Revenues - Volatility of Expenditures - Government Finance Officers (GFOA) - Other: Program Phase Out Plan She explained that they had determined that the best methodology was the "Program Phase Out Plan." She added that the following slide was brought to the directors in August regarding the Program Phase Out Plan and that they had determined that the appropriate fund balance for the phase out over four (4) years was $17.5 million, which equated to 37% of the operating budget for FY 2011. The chart showed the following information: Revenue: Year 5 FY2015 Sales Tax 44,416,249 SSI Revenue 4,492,402 Interest 425,647 Fund Balance 17.539.333 Total Revenue $66,873,631 Expenditures: Cut Immediately 1,046,765 Unfunded Unfunded Unfunded FY2016 FY2017 FY2018 0 0 0 4,492,402 4,492,402 0 327,160 102,066 13,690 24,855,471 9,475,262 1,486,311 $29,675,033 $14,069,730 $1,500,000 0 0 0 CITY OF FORT WORTH CRIME CONTROL AND PREVENTION DISTRICT BOARD NOVEMBER 16, 2010 Page 12 of 18 Remaining Programs to Phase Out Unknown Expenditures Total Expenditures Net Balance 30,956,301 17,195,242 9,578,891 10,015,094 3,004,528 3,004,528 $42,018,160 $20,199,771 $12,583,420 $24,855,471 $9,475,262 $1,486,311 1,500,000 0 $1,500,000 0 Ms. Graham explained that based upon that decision, the City staff had prepared a policy statement amendment for their consideration as follows: Policy Statement No. 4 Amendment: 4. Fund Balance Policy Statement: The Board shall maintain the fund balance at a level sufficient to protect the City's CCPD financial position from emergencies. a. Unreserved Designated Fund Balance. The purpose of the Unreserved Designated fund balance is to cover approximately two (2) years of the Civil Service Pay Plan and the cost of sworn personnel as the positions are phased out over a four -year period if the CCPD is dissolved. The Board shall strive to maintain the fund balance of the CCPD at thirty seven (37 %) percent of the CCPD's current year operating budget. b. Use of Fund Balance. Fund Balance shall be used only for emergencies to correct an operating deficit, non - recurring expenditures, or major capital purchases that cannot be accommodated through current year savings. In approving the use of the Fund Balance to which the fund balance target is not maintained, the Board shall also recommend steps to restore the fund balance to the percentage described in subsection a. of this Section. Ms. Graham explained that the main changes that they did on this amendment were to change the fund balance percentage requirement to 37% and they accomplished some word verbiage cleanup which was in the color blue on the slide and underlined. She added that they had also met with the Chief Financial Officer Lena Ellis on the fund balance name issue and Ms. Graham pointed out the name had been changed to the "unreserved designated fund balance." She clarified that the "unreserved" meant that there were no legal claims to the fund balance from external entities and "designated" meant that it was a balance that was dedicated for a special purpose. She reiterated that these were the changes to Policy Statement No. 4 to the Financial Management Policy Statements for CCPD. Ms. Graham explained that the action that the City staff was recommending to the directors was for the Board to approve the amendment to Policy Statement No. 4 of the Fort Worth Crime Control and Prevention District Financial Management Policy Statements. CITY OF FORT WORTH CRIME CONTROL AND PREVENTION DISTRICT BOARD NOVEMBER 16, 2010 Page 13 of 18 Action Item: Overview and Approval of Amendments to the CCPD Financial Policy (cont'd) President Moncrief opened the floor for discussion and /or a motion. (Agenda Item V -A) MOTION: A motion was made by Director Jordan and seconded by Director Moss to approve Policy Statement No. 4 of the Fort Worth Crime Control and Prevention District Financial Management Policy Statements. The directors voted seven (7) ayes and zero (0) nays, with Directors Hicks and Scarth being absent, in favor of the motion. The motion carried. Consideration And Approval Of Mid -Year Budget Amendments In The Amount Of $2,126,351to Fund Additional Vehicles And $1,961,100 To Increase Police Recruit Class (Agenda Item V -B) Shallah Graham, Senior Administrative Services Manager, Police Department, spoke before the directors on several mid -year budget amendments. Using a PowerPoint presentation, she described the mid -year budget amendments to fund additional vehicles and increase the number of police recruit classes. She began her presentation with a slide showing the projected attrition with the adopted budget for turnover. She clarified that it did not include any authorized strength within the department. She stated that they were currently experiencing 33 vacancies and they have authorized strength at 1555. She explained that they have recruit training Class 127 that started in November 2010 and was due to graduate in June of 2011. She pointed out on the chart that when the class graduated in June their attrition dropped to 45. She stated that at the end of 2011 they would end the year with 55 vacancies on the books, which would give them 1500 civil service positions filled. Ms. Graham continued her presentation and pointed out that at the end of 2012, without an additional training class, their attrition would grow to 102 vacancies, thus leaving only 1453 positions filled. Ms. Graham presented a slide with the following information: Recruit Officer Training Overview - Adopted FY2011 Budget - $1,384,021 - Cost per Recruit (approx. 30 recruits) -$46,134 CITY OF FORT WORTH CRIME CONTROL AND PREVENTION DISTRICT BOARD NOVEMBER 16, 2010 Page 14 of 18 Consideration And Approval Of Mid -Year Budget Amendments In The Amount Of $2,126,351to Fund Additional Vehicles And $1,961,100 To Increase Police Recruit Class (cont'd) (Agenda Item V -B) She explained that this cost included salary, benefits, uniform, gun, supplies and classes. She added that they were proposing to increase the Recruit Officer Training Classes as follows: Class # Participants Start Date End Date Cost Class 127 25 11/1/2010 06/3/2011 $1,153,355 Class 128 30 03/28/2011 10/12/2011 $1,324,026 Class 129 40 07/11/2011 02/10/2012 $714,336 Total Funding Needed for Proposed Classes $3,191,917 Additional Funding Needed $1,807,896 She presented another charter showing how these additional classes would affect the attrition. She pointed out that by adding the additional Class 128 it would bring down the attrition from 55 vacancies to 27 vacancies. Ms. Graham further explained that with Class 129 added, it would bring the attrition down to only 4 vacancies. She pointed out that this would result in only 37 vacancies at the end of 2012. She explained that this chart was based upon their historical attrition. She added that this would give the Police Department 1523 filled position in 2012. Ms. Graham explained that the other portion of the request was for approval of early vehicle replacement. She provided the following information: Vehicle Replacement Overview - Crown Victoria discontinued after the 2011 production schedule - New line of Police Patrol cars (Ford, Chevrolet, Dodge) in FY2012 - More expensive - PD needs to test and evaluate which model to replace patrol She explained at the current time she did not know what model would be selected as the new line of police cars until the new cars were tested and evaluated to see which one fit the Police Department's operational needs. She explained again that these new models would be more expensive and the Police Department would also have to purchase new minor equipment to fit the new cars. Ms. Graham presented the following information on a slide: CITY OF FORT WORTH CRIME CONTROL AND PREVENTION DISTRICT BOARD NOVEMBER 16, 2010 Page 15 of 18 Consideration And Approval Of Mid -Year Budget Amendments In The Amount Of $2,126,351to Fund Additional Vehicles And $1,961,100 To Increase Police Recruit Class (cont'd) Vehicle Replacement Savings Overview Price Communication Trays Center Console MDC Mounting Cost Per Car Cost of Replacement @ 140 Existing Crown Victoria $22,953 Reuse Reuse Reuse $22,953 $3,213,420 New Vehicle Projections (Low) $24,953 $300 $300 $500 $26,053 $3,647,420 (Agenda Item V -B) New Vehicle Projections (High) $28,953 $300 $300 $500 $30,053 $4,207,420 Purchasing Crown Victoria FY2012 replacements in FY 2011: $434,000 to $994,000 Ms. Graham presented information for FY 2012 Early Replacement Savings in a slide with the following information: Will not request replacement funding in FY 2012, only funding for unrepairable vehicles Proposed Early Replacement Cost $3,213,420 GASB 45 Savings $1,087,069 Funds Needed $2,126,351 She added by taking this approach, it would give the Police Department the time to test and evaluate the new police cars. Ms. Graham continued her presentation with a review of the FY 2010 Projected Fund Balance in a chart as follows: Current Fund Balance Unaudited Fund Balance 9/30/10 $30,220,696 Less Projected FY2010 Rollovers ($3,249,777) Projected Adjusted Fund Balance 9/30/11 $28,688,731 FY2011 37% Fund Balance Requirement $17,550,890 CITY OF FORT WORTH CRIME CONTROL AND PREVENTION DISTRICT BOARD NOVEMBER 16, 2010 Page 16 of 18 Consideration And Approval Of Mid -Year Budget Amendments In The Amount Of $2,126,351to Fund Additional Vehicles And $1,961,100 To Increase Police Recruit Class (cont'd) (Agenda Item V -B) Ms. Graham then presented information in the following charts on how these requests would affect the Fund Balance After Mid Year Amendments: Unaudited Fund Balance 9/30/10 $30,220,696 Less Recruit Officer Training ($1,807.896) Less: Early Replacement of I ligh Mileage Vehicles ($2,126,351) Less Projected FY2010 Rollovers ($3,249,777) Plus Projected Crime Lab Savings $1,717,812 Projected Adjusted Fund Balance 9/30/11 $24,754,484 FY2011 37% Fund Balance Requirement $17,550,890 Ms. Graham advised that the recommendation was to open the Public Hearing and receive public comment on the mid -year budget amendments in the amount of $2,126,351 to fund early replacement of high mileage vehicles and up to $1,961,100 to increase recruit officer training. President Moncrief opened the public hearing. No one requested to speak either for or against this proposal. MOTION: A motion was made by Director Jordan and seconded by Director Espino to close the public hearing and approve the mid -year budget amendments in the amount of $2,126,351 and the use of projected savings of $1,060,234 to fund early replacement of high mileage vehicles and up to $1,961,100 to increase the recruit officer training. The directors voted seven (7) ayes and zero (0) nays, with Directors Hicks and Scarth being absent, in favor of the motion. The motion carried. Discussion of Proposed CCPD Board Calendar of Meetings/Events (Agenda Item VI) Monique Moore, Assistant Director over Administrative Services in the Police Department, indicated that she wanted to review and discuss the proposed CCPD Board Calendar of Meetings /Events for 2011. She indicated that some of the issues that they took into consideration were holding the meetings in the evenings, holding them on the fifth Tuesdays in the appropriate month and to not hold the meetings on a date when a regular City Council CITY OF FORT WORTH CRIME CONTROL AND PREVENTION DISTRICT BOARD NOVEMBER 16, 2010 Page 17 of 18 Discussion of Proposed CCPD Board Calendar of Meetings/Events (cont'd) (Agenda Item VI) meeting was being held and to also meet the statutory requirements that mandate the date when the budget must be adopted. She then reviewed the calendar of meetings and events. She explained that the first meeting was proposed for Thursday, February 17, 2011, at 7:00 p.m., and it was designated as the first quarter meeting. She explained that if there were no actions items or presentations requiring a meeting, then the meeting would not be scheduled; however, the first quarter report would be provided to the directors. She indicated that the second meeting date was scheduled for Thursday, May 19, 2011, at 7:00 p.m., which was the second quarter meeting. Ms. Monroe added that at this meeting the staff would bring forward the proposed budget for FY 2012. She continued the review of the calendar and identified the third meeting as Thursday, June 16, 2011, at 7:00 p.m. She explained that this would be the public hearing on the proposed budget and the approval date of the proposed budget document. Ms. Monroe stated that the next meeting would be Tuesday, August 30, 2011, at 7:00 p.m. and would be the third quarter meeting. She pointed out to the City Council that this date would also be a budget workshop meeting date; therefore, it may be a long meeting day for the City Council. She pointed out that the last meeting date for the year would be Tuesday, November 15, 2011, which would be held immediately following the regular City Council meeting and it would be for the fourth quarter. She reiterated that if there were no action items or presentations, then there would be no meeting and the fourth quarter report would be sent to the directors. Ms. Monroe completed her presentation. Director Burns expressed appreciation for the scheduling of the night meetings with a set meeting time for citizens to attend, particularly the individuals that used to serve on the CCPD Board. President Moncrief also indicated that he was pleased that a meeting would not have to be held unless there was action to be taken by the board. It was the consensus of the board members that the meeting schedule was acceptable. Citizen Comments (Agenda Item VII) No one appeared to speak before the board at this time. CITY OF FORT WORTH CRIME CONTROL AND PREVENTION DISTRICT BOARD NOVEMBER 16, 2010 Page 18 of 18 Future Agenda Items There were no future agenda items requested by the board members. Adjourn (Agenda Item VIII) (Agenda Item IX) With no further presentations or discussions, President Moncrief adjourned the regular meeting of the Crime Control and Prevention District Board of Directors at 2:47 p.m., on Tuesday, November 16, 2010. These minutes approved by the Crime Control and Prevention District Board of Directors on the 19th day of May, 2011. APPROVED: W. B. "AC Zimmerman, Vice President Minutes Prepared by and Attest: rA� Marty Hendrix, ecretary