Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAbout2010/06/15-Minutes-Crime Control and Prevention District (CCPD) (4)CITY OF FORT WORTH CRIME CONTROL AND PREVENTION DISTRICT BOARD OF DIRECTORS REGULAR MEETING JUNE 15, 2010 Present: Mike Moncrief, President W. B. "Zim" Zimmerman, Vice President Director Salvador Espino Director Danny Scarth (arrived at 7:04 p.m.) Director Frank Moss (arrived at 7:04 p.m.) Director Jungus Jordan Director Carter Burdette Director Kathleen Hicks Director Joel Burns City Staff: Tom Higgins, Assistant City Manager Charlene Sanders, Assistant City Attorney Marty Hendrix, Secretary Jeff Halstead, Police Chief Shallah Graham, Senior Administrative Services Manager Other City Staff in Attendance: Rhonda Robertson, Executive Deputy Chief, Police Department Monique Lee, Director of Administrative Services, Police Department 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 7:00 p.m., on Tuesday, June 15, 2010, in the Pre -Council Chamber of the Fort Worth Municipal Building, 1000 Throckmorton, Fort Worth, Texas 76102. President Moncrief advised members of the audience who wished to address the board of directors to be sure and fill out speaker cards in order to be recognized. Approval of Minutes of the May 18, 2010 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 June 15, 2010 Page 2 of 22 Approval of Minutes of the May 18, 2010 Meeting (cont'd) (Agenda Item II) MOTION: Upon a motion made by Director Zimmerman and seconded by Director Jordan, the directors voted seven (7) and zero (0) "nays", with Directors Scarth and Moss temporarily absent, to approve the minutes of the May 18, 2010, Crime Control and Prevention District Board of Directors meeting. The motion carried unanimously. Written Reports (Agenda Item III) President Moncrief advised the following reports had been provided to the directors. He opened the floor for questions and/or comments. There were no questions or comments. A. Cost/Benefit of Staffing DNA Unit B. Funding for Community Based Programs C. Addition of Recruits in the Training Program These reports were received as a matter of information. There was no formal action taken by the directors on this agenda item. (Directors Moss and Scarth arrived at the meeting.) Discussion and Consideration of the FY 2011 CCPD Budget (Agenda Item IV) President Moncrief advised that this agenda item was an action item for the directors. He explained that Shallah Graham, Senior Administrative Services Manager, Police Department, would provide a budget presentation under the Staff Report, the Public Hearing would be conducted and then action would be taken by the directors to adopt the budget and send it to the City Council for two more public hearings to be held on July 13 and August 3, 2010, at which time it would then be considered for final approval. Staff Report Shallah Graham, Senior Administrative Services Manager, Police Department, advised that she would be presenting the FY 2011 CCPD proposed budget. She added that the purpose of this meeting was to approve a budget to send to the City Council for a public hearing scheduled for July 13, 2010. Using a PowerPoint presentation, she provided a slide showing the sales tax history with color -coded information on the actual revenue, projected revenue and year- CITY OF FORT WORTH CRIME CONTROL AND PREVENTION DISTRICT BOARD June 15, 2010 Page 3 of 22 Discussion and Consideration of the FY 2011 CCPD Budget (cont'd) (Agenda Item IV) Staff Report (cont'd) to -date revenue for the years 2002 to 2010. She added that it showed revenue income to date at $27.4 million. She advised that the sales tax revenue was down $1.7 million, from the previous year. She pointed out that the Police Department had just received the latest sales tax information and there was a small increase for the month of April that equaled to 1 %. She presented the next slide that showed the FY 2011 Projected Revenue Overview as follows: FY2010 FY 2011 Adopted Projected Increase/ Budget Budget (Decrease) Revenue Sales Tax (rate: %2%) $45,654,866 $42,237,472 ($3,417,394) School Security $4,090,074 $ 4,631,258 $541,184 Misc. $164,274 $164,274 $0 Interest $906,971 $344,911 ($562,060) Total $50,816,185 $47,377,915 ($3,438,270) She explained each of the revenue categories and provided an explanation of the figures that were presented. She pointed out that the school security reimbursement had changed from her presentation on May 18, 2010, and the expenditure and corresponding revenue reimbursement had decreased. She advised that the proposed additional school security officer for the Northwest Independent School District (NWISD) was not being requested by the NWISD. She stated that with that position not being added, it reduced the costs associated with the position and the revenue reimbursement that the school district would have to pay back to the CCPD fund. She explained that the miscellaneous revenue was for reimbursement from other agencies and from the graffiti abatement program. She emphasized that the total revenues altogether were $47,377,915, which were down by $3.4 million from last year. Ms. Graham showed a slide of the FY 2011 Required Expenditure Increases as follows: FY 2010 Adopted Budget $50,625,925 Contractual Increase $2,023,685 CITY OF FORT WORTH CRIME CONTROL AND PREVENTION DISTRICT BOARD June 15, 2010 Page 4 of 22 Discussion and Consideration of the FY 2011 CCPD Budget (cont'd) (Agenda Item IV) Staff Report (cont'd) Benefit Increase $178,139 Supplemental Pay/Misc. Increases $22,314 GASB 45 $1,073,652 FY 2011 $53,923,715 Ms. Graham clarified the contractual increase was the result of the meet and confer negotiations, with salary increases, retirement cost increases, and the effect on Medicare and shift differential pay. She explained that the increase in the benefit line item was due to the 13% in healthcare benefits and civilian retiree increases of 2%. Ms. Graham explained the increase in the supplemental pay was due to longevity and bilingual pay. She explained the funding for the GASB 45 requirements, which was for the non -pension retirement benefits. She summarized the budget figures by stating that if there was no further action taken on the proposed budget, it would be increased for FY 2011 to $53,923,715, a $3,923,715 increase. She reviewed the balancing of the FY 2011 Budget as follows: FY2011 Projected Revenue $47,377,915 FY2011 Projected Budget $53,923,715 Out of Balance ($6,545,800) Ms. Graham advised that by taking the revenue figure from the projected budget figure, the budget was out of balance by $6,468,873. She indicated that work was necessary to put the budget back into balance. She explained that this could be addressed by looking at the decision packages and the line item reductions. Ms. Graham then presented the FY 2011 Decision Packages as follows: Decision Package Improvement Packages DNA Unit - Personnel and Supplies Reduction Packages Freeze Funding for Cadet Program Total Decision Packages Authorized Amount Positions 3 $232,428 0 ($102,008) 3 $130,420 CITY OF FORT WORTH CRIME CONTROL AND PREVENTION DISTRICT BOARD June 15, 2010 Page 5 of 22 Discussion and Consideration of the FY 2011 CCPD Budget (cont'd) Staff Report (cont'd) Removed Decision Packages Transfer Personnel Cost for Homeland -11 Security Add School Resource Officer 1 (Agenda Item IV) $1,190,329 $90,507 She pointed out that these decision packages had changed from the presentation given on May 18, 2010. She advised that the DNA unit personnel and supplies had remained as a decision packet and would bring benefits to the department as they could get additional revenue from insourcing, save money from outsourcing, have the opportunity to apply for grants and overall there would be timing benefits over a five (5) year period of time in the amount of $1.5 million. She spoke about the reduction package, which would be freezing the cadet program. She stated that this program was for college students who were interested in being police officers. She indicated that they received a small salary, uniform and tuition reimbursement. Ms. Graham indicated that this program had been suspended in the past. She explained that this would result in a reduction of $102,000. Ms. Graham pointed out the two line items that were removed decision packages, which were the transfer of police personnel for Homeland Security to the City's General Fund and the additional school resource officer for Northwest ISD. She clarified that a decision had been made to not transfer the Homeland Security personnel to the City's General Fund for next year. She explained that this was due to the Police Department's General Fund budget increases and the request that the department provide for a 5% reduction or $9 million. She added that there was no fiscal capacity to absorb those 11 positions in the General Fund. She reiterated that the agreement to transfer 125 positions from the CCPD to the City's General Fund over a five (5) year period of time was still in place. She reiterated the reason that the school resource officer was not being added at Northwest ISD. Ms. Graham reviewed the amendments to balance the budget as follows and provided explanations for how these numbers were determined: CITY OF FORT WORTH CRIME CONTROL AND PREVENTION DISTRICT BOARD June 15, 2010 Page 6 of 22 Discussion and Consideration of the FY 2011 CCPD Budget (cont'd) Staff Report (cont'd) Major Line Item Reductions (Over $50,000) Election Cost $490,000 Helicopter Purchase $129,000 Overtime Reduction $719,000 Parks Policing of Pools $70,000 Technology Fund $765,000 Reduce Contracts: Comin' Up Sites $72,000 Crime Prevention Agency $50,000 Safe Haven $96,000 After School Program $320,000 Community Based $38,000 Historical Program Savings $645,000 SOD - Special Undercover Car Lease $95,000 New Vehicle Purchases $1,963,000 New Recruit Training $779,000 Vacancy Savings $440,000 Line Item Total $6,671,000 (Agenda Item IV) Ms. Graham advised that the election cost had been eliminated as no election was necessary for next year as the CCPD had just been renewed for another five (5) years. She pointed out that the helicopter purchase had been delayed until the City Council had approved a resolution on the location of the heliport. She explained that the policy of the City pools had been reduced as all of the pools had been closed except for the Forest Park pool. Ms. Graham explained in the figures shown, staff had taken a 20% reduction in the community -based programs. Ms. Graham explained that the City staff had gone though the line items and found the history program savings amount of $645,000. She explained that police auction vehicles would now take the place of purchasing new vehicles to be used for undercover purposes, thus resulting in a savings of $95,000. She also explained that the purchase of new police vehicles had been delayed for another year. She clarified that the department would receive grant funding for some vehicles. She stated that one grant was providing 20 vehicles and another was providing 15 vehicles. She added that the new recruit training figure was the result of reducing the number of new recruits from 55 to 30. She explained that the class would not start until the CITY OF FORT WORTH CRIME CONTROL AND PREVENTION DISTRICT BOARD June 15, 2010 Page 7 of 22 Discussion and Consideration of the FY 2011 CCPD Budp-et (cont'd) (Agenda Item IV) Staff Report (cont'd) department had the vacancies to absorb the new recruits. She then spoke about the vacancy savings, which was the result of terminations, retirements and turn over. Ms. Graham pointed out that they now have achieved almost $6.6 million in reductions. Ms. Graham presented another chart showing the Proposed FY 2011 CCPD Budget Overview information as follows: FY 2010 FY 2011 Revised Proposed Increase/ Programs Budget Budget (Decrease) Violent Crimes and Gangs $11,546,965 $12,313,486 $766,521 Neighborhood Crime $10,400,856 $10,546,693 $145,837 School Safety & Youth $8,691,428 $9,107,664 $416,236 Police Enhancements $23,661,634 $15,849,920 ($7,811,714) Salary Savings from Vacancies $0 ($439,848) ($439,848) Budget Comparison $54,300,882 $47,377,915 ($6,922,968) She explained that this chart had changed from the one previously presented at the last meeting on May 18, 2010. She advised that the funding for the categories of Violent Crimes and Gangs, School Safety and Youth and Police Enhancements had all changed. She reviewed those changes. Ms. Graham indicated that the Violent Crimes and Gangs had increased due to the fact that the 11 policing positions identified in the Homeland Security transfer to the General Fund would not be recommended for transfer in the FY 2011 budget and would remain in the CCPD's budget for next year. She explained that the School Safety and Youth category had been reduced due to the fact that the proposed school safety officer would not be added to the Northwest ISD. She explained that the Police Enhancements had also been reduced due to the fact that the Police Department would delay the purchase of vehicles. Ms. Graham referenced the category of Salary Savings from Vacancies in the amount of $439,848. She explained that the resulting FY 2011 proposed budget would be $47,337,915. Ms. Graham continued her presentation by showing a chart of the FY 2011 Proposed Budget Overview as follows: CITY OF FORT WORTH CRIME CONTROL AND PREVENTION DISTRICT BOARD June 15, 2010 Page 8 of 22 Discussion and Consideration of the FY 2011 CCPD Budget (cont'd) (Agenda Item IV) Staff Report (cont'd) Authorized Programs Budget Positions Sworn Civilian Violent Crimes and Gangs $12,313,486 102 94 8 Neighborhood Crime $10,546,693 78 64 14 School Safety and Youth $9,107,664 69 69 0 Police Enhancements $15,849,920 5 2 *3 Salary Savings from 0 0 0 Vacancies Adjustments ($439,848) Sub -Total $47,377,915 254 229 25 *Position Increase from DNA Unit Personnel & Supplies She reviewed the number of authorized police personnel assigned to each of the programs. She pointed out that the one category which would be increased for staffing was the Police Enhancements, which included the three (3) positions for the DNA Unit personnel. Ms. Graham presented and reviewed in detail the chart showing the FY 2011 Projected Fund Balance as follows: Audited Fund Balance 9/30/09 $30,247,000 Plus FY 2010 Projected Revenues $46,919,945 Less FY 2010 Projected Expenditures ($44,949,888) Less: FY 2009 Rollovers ($3,674,956) Projected Adjusted Fund Balance 9/30/10 $28,542,101 Plus FY 2011 Projected Revenues $47,377,915 Less FY 2011 Projected Expenditures ($47,377,915) Projected Adjusted Fund Balance 9/30/11 *$28,542,141 FY 2011 Target @ 60% $28,472,906 *Did not include rollovers. She advised that the board of directors would be discussing the fund balance policy after the budget adoption process. She reviewed the above chart with the directors and identified the fund balance at the end of FY 2011 budget process. Ms. Graham provided a recap of the FY 2011 CCPD Budget Process next steps as follows: CITY OF FORT WORTH CRIME CONTROL AND PREVENTION DISTRICT BOARD June 15, 2010 Page 9 of 22 Discussion and Consideration of the FY 2011 CCPD Budget (cont'd) (Agenda Item IV) Staff Report (cont'd) City Council Process July 13 City Council Public Hearing on Proposed FYI I Budget August 3 City Council Take Action on Proposed FYI 1 Budget Ms. Graham advised that the City staff s recommendation was to re -open the public hearing continued from May 18, 2010, and receive public comment. Ms. Graham concluded her presentation. President Moncrief opened the floor or discussion and/or comments. Public Hearing MOTION: Upon a motion made by Director Scarth and seconded by Director Espino, the public hearing on the FY 2011 CCPD budget was reopened. The directors voted nine (9) "ayes" and zero (0) "nays" in favor of the motion. The motion carried. President Moncrief declared the public hearing reopened. The following individual appeared before the directors in opposition to the CCPD Budget regarding the cut in expenditures for the CODE BLUE program: Camille Drinan, 5736 Fair Wind Street, Fort Worth, Texas 76135, appeared before the board of directors and advised that she had been an active member of the Citizens on Patrol (COP) and Citizens Police Academy (CPA) for fifteen years and she had watched the changes that have occurred. She indicated that she had spoken often to the members of the previous CCPD Board of Directors about issues of things that were needed. She stated that unfortunately the things that were requisitioned for her groups were not forthcoming, but passed on to other areas. She stated that she had mentioned continuously that the City was underutilizing the CPA members and COP members. She added that they have been trained and were eager to help. She added that some of the things that she had found that other cities did that helped the participation of the groups, when they graduated from their programs, was that they got commitments from their participants for a certain number of hours for actual community service hours. She added CITY OF FORT WORTH CRIME CONTROL AND PREVENTION DISTRICT BOARD June 15, 2010 Page 10 of 22 Discussion and Consideration of the FY 2011 CCPD Budget (cont'd) (Agenda Item IV) Public Hearing (cont'd) that they have lost a lot of their members not through anything more than just not being able to participate. She added that she felt it was not fair to the City nor was it fair to the active members. She stated she felt it would keep the people in the program by offering the City more opportunities to help in the different areas where they could help, i.e., data entry, making phone calls. She clarified that this would help to alleviate some of the problems of the budget and keep the members interested. She added that she had another thought. She pointed out the City paid the coordinators which she did not mind; however, she was not happy with all of the coordinators. She suggested that their pay be suspended and the City should take on volunteer coordinators to see if they could help improve the participation. She added that another issue was some of the Neighborhood Police Officers (NPOs). She stated that most of the groups have very dedicated NPOs; however, there were some groups that did not have dedicated NPOs. She added that those should be relooked at in order to put in really strong NPOs to assis with keeping the programs consistently active and let the other NPOs go on to other duties where they would be better suited. She reiterated that those were the issues that she wanted to address the directors about and wanted them to consider. She added that she did not want any funding cut from the COP or CPAA or CODE BLUE Programs as the members of those groups gave a lot to the community and could give more if the City would only let them. Director Burns spoke about Ms. Brinan's comments. He pointed out that in the proposed budget that had been provided to the directors, one of the very smallest changes of the line items was a reduction in the CODE BLUE Program of $41,000.00. He added that reduction was one of the most important. He added that CODE BLUE was such an integral part of the City's CCPD. He added that the individuals that served in the program were the City's allies and were going out and working to reauthorize the CCPD. He added it was the human face of what much of the CCPD was, as well as the Neighborhood Police Officers and others. He reiterated that they were the citizen face of the CCPD and he was worried about the reductions. He pointed out that $41,000 was not much since the CCPD had a fund balance overage of $69,000.00. He requested that the directors try to augment this small amount of funding of $41,924 that had been a reduction in CODE BLUE. He felt it would be money well spent and hoped that the funding could be found. He added that he understood that there were also other issues to consider and discuss around other aspects of the CCPD budget; however, this was certainly one of the aspects that jumped out at him. President Moncrief indicated that he agreed with Director Burns' observation especially when he was going to ask that the directors also set aside some money in the amount of $15,000 CITY OF FORT WORTH CRIME CONTROL AND PREVENTION DISTRICT BOARD June 15, 2010 Page 11 of 22 Discussion and Consideration of the FY 2011 CCPD Budget (cont'd) (Agenda Item IV) Public Hearing (cont'd) for a recruitment campaign for the CODE BLUE and Citizens on Patrol Programs. He added that if that much funding was not necessary, then it could always be placed back into the fund balance. President Moncrief indicated that he felt the suggestion was necessary in order to recruit the next generation of "eyes and ears" and to be able to augment the citizens that were currently contributing their time and energy to keep their neighborhoods safe. He encouraged the directors to make that recommendation to the City Council. He added that he felt it would be money well spent. Director Jordan indicated that he concurred with the comments made by President Moncrief and Director Burns. He added that Citizens on Patrol were the life blood of the City's operations and the City should be recruiting more not less individuals to serve. He pointed out that his second issue was the Homeland Security policing positions and he posed a question to Police Chief Halstead as to whether the City had gotten a grant for Homeland Security participation. Police Chief Jeff Halstead advised that early in the grant cycle across the Nation there were many positions that were funded by grants; however, those numbers had been greatly reduced over time. He pointed out that now the federal grant funding came through for only specialized equipment and other apparatus that could assist in the goals for Homeland Security. He stated that to his knowledge, the City did not have any positions that were grant funded through federal dollars for Homeland Security, but a lot of equipment and apparatus was funded. Director Jordan also requested clarification on the $1.1 million for the 11 positions for Homeland Security that was to be transferred from the CCPD budget to the City's General Fund and whether there were other police officer positions that were going to be transferred. Chief Halstead indicated that only those 11 positions were proposed initially to be transferred from the CCPD budget to the City's General Fund. Director Jordan clarified that now the recommendation was that those positions were not going to be transferred. Chief Halstead indicated that was a correct statement. President Moncrief interjected that decision had to be made due to the lack of funding available in the City's General Fund budget for next year. He added that he was still committed to the transfer of the 129 positions over five (5) years and he felt that the directors were also committed. He added that it was just hard to do so this year due to the General Fund's budget shortfall and he just did not see how it could be done. Director Jordan put forth the question of how the directors would continue to put forth that five (5) year plan and added his third point was the $400,000 in savings due to vacancies. He added he was CITY OF FORT WORTH CRIME CONTROL AND PREVENTION DISTRICT BOARD June 15, 2010 Page 12 of 22 Discussion and Consideration of the FY 2011 CCPD Budmet (cont'd) (Agenda Item IV) Public Hearing (cont'd) assuming that they were not changing the number of authorized positions but because of the lack in attrition versus training, the City was going to have positions that would stay vacant. He asked that since the City had a two-year training cycle, how long the positions stayed vacant. Chief Halstead indicated that he was going to have his staff explain this situation because there was a combination of General Fund freezes and others, but the vacancies that were realized were from attrition, termination of employment, separations, etc. He added that there were other obligations that had been made and other budget discussions that those vacancies had to remain vacant. He called upon Shallah Graham to explain the details. Shallah Graham, Senior Administrative Services Manager, Police Department, advised that the calculation for vacancies in the CCPD budget in the amount of $440,000 was similar to how it was handled in the City's General Fund budget. She clarified that it was based upon the attrition of retirees, voluntary separations, terminations, etc. She indicated that the City staff had done an historical analysis to capture what had occurred in previous years in order to determine that calculation and then it had been placed in the CCPD budget so that it could be accounted for this year. Director Jordan requested clarification as to what would be the next step and to him it appeared that the CCPD budget would now go forward to the City Council. Ms. Graham indicated that was correct. She explained that the City Council could either accept the budget as proposed or reject the budget. She indicated that if the City Council rejected the budget, it would come back to the board of directors for further discussion. Director Jordan indicated that one of the discussions and one of the concerns when the directors looked at the budget was the 60% reserve level. He explained that if the board of directors changed that policy, which he understood was within their prerogative to do, and the board of directors went to a 50% or a 40% reserve level, would the Police Department be able to fund the vacancies. He added his other question was to look at in the future whether there were any savings in the City's General Fund budget to look at a reduction in the overtime hours and to use the overtime hours to fund the recruit classes in order to keep the positions filled. He indicated that at the next go round he wanted to see those alternatives and options as to whether the City could maintain the current levels of authorizations in the Police Department and maintain the funding and do the recruitment classes through several options, i.e., one was the reduction of overtime in the City's General Fund and one was to reduce the CCPD reserve fund to 40110 or 501o level. CITY OF FORT WORTH CRIME CONTROL AND PREVENTION DISTRICT BOARD June 15, 2010 Page 13 of 22 Discussion and Consideration of the FY 2011 CCPD Budget (cont'd) (Agenda Item IV) Public Hearing (cont'd) Director Scarth requested to know what the ultimate impact of the $41,000 reduction in the CODE BLUE Program would be. Ms. Graham indicated that the City staff had taken a small reduction in all line items. She added that they were looking at creative solutions in regards to getting extra funding for the CODE BLUE banquet and things like that. She added staff was thinking of going to outside agencies to request further funding options. She stated that some of the reductions were related to small line item adjustments across-the-board and some of the reductions were related to the CODE BLUE Conference. Director Scarth indicated that some thought to how that reduction could be returned might be given or creative opportunities for ways to supplement that effort that would not be hard dollars. He added that Director Burns might want to provide a follow-up to that suggestion. Director Scarth stated he felt there was some merit in the discussion of the reduction of the reserve fund only because the last couple of years the City had been near the end of the authorization period approved by the citizens for the CCPD and now the City was in the beginning of that authorization period. He pointed out concern for the risk of having a CCPD Budget in place that was not authorized by the citizens and the need to have to put the CCPD funded items in the City's General Fund. He added it was much less a risk now than it was a year ago because the CCPD had been renewed. He pointed out that might lend some credence to the idea that Director Jordan was putting forward in reducing that fund balance. He stated that obviously the board of directors could not commit future City Councils to do something. He added that the idea would hopefully be that if the reserve fund was reduced today over the next four or five years then it could be increased so that going into an election year the CCPD would be well positioned to have a transition from the CCPD to the General Fund if they had to do so. President Moncrief interjected that he wanted the board of directors to thoroughly vet that before doing so. He pointed out that it was put into place for a reason. He added he wanted to make sure that there were no unintended consequences for the short term or the long term. He indicated that he did support getting the community involved in some of the areas of activities and could assist in the recruitment efforts as well. Director Burns requested from the City staff the title of the line items that were reduced. He added that in addition to the recruitment, there needed to be a focus on the retention of members in order to keep the ones that are currently serving. President Moncrief indicated that he felt they could do both. CITY OF FORT WORTH CRIME CONTROL AND PREVENTION DISTRICT BOARD June 15, 2010 Page 14 of 22 Discussion and Consideration of the FY 2011 CCPD Budget (cont'd) (Agenda Item IV) Public Hearing (cont'd) In response to Director Burns' request, Shallah Graham reviewed the line items that had been reduced. She explained those were a minor reduction in postage, $10,000 in operating supplies, $18,000 in reduction in mileage reimbursement, $6,000 in other contractual where the funding is located for the CODE BLUE Conference. Director Scarth spoke about the training of the CODE BLUE members and an effort to tighten up their training and perhaps be more reliant on technology and media presentations and that might reduce the number of hours on the staffing level and aid the recruitment process, if the process of training could be tightened up. He pointed out that he was acquainted with several CODE BLUE members who made some good suggestions. President Moncrief stated that he felt there needed to be some out -of -the -box ideas on how to recruit and retain member for the CODE BLUE and the Citizens on Patrol. Director Zimmerman indicated that as he understood it, the Chief had committed to reducing to 125 FTE's over a five (5) year period. He pointed out that he could not find anything in the documents presented that tracked that issue and how the CCPD Board of Directors were going to get there. He suggested that the budget process needed to be amended to reflect how they were going to attain that goal. He added he felt it was very important that they move that out of the CCPD Budget and into the General Fund Budget. Chief Halstead responded that he had met with the Budget Officer Horatio Porter and Assistant City Manager Tom Higgins and they had set up a five (5) year schedule. He indicated that the schedule could be provided to the board of directors. President Moncrief requested further clarification from Director Zimmerman on whether he wanted to restore the recommendation to defer for another year the moving of the 11 Homeland Security positions to the City's General Fund Budget for next year. Director Zimmerman explained that he understood that the CCPD had a five (5) year plan to move out 125 FTE's from the CCPD Budget to the City's General Fund Budget. He added that he felt there needed to be a line item in the proposed budget for next year that the board of directors could track to show that they were in fact moving towards that goal. He added he felt it was important that this be done. CITY OF FORT WORTH CRIME CONTROL AND PREVENTION DISTRICT BOARD June 15, 2010 Page 15 of 22 Discussion and Consideration of the FY 2011 CCPD Budget (cont'd) (Agenda Item IV) Public Hearing (cont'd) President Moncrief clarified further with,Chief Halstead that the transfer of positions was not going to be done for next year's budget. Chief Halstead indicated that was correct and that he was going to provide the document that was prepared that showed how over five (5) years the 125 positions would all eventually be transferred to the City's General Fund Budget. He explained that for the FY 2011 Budget, the Police Department was already facing a 5% budget reduction and he would have to find another $1.2 million to cut in order to transfer the 11 positions from the CCPD Budget to their General Fund Budget. He spoke about their work to find these reductions and their efforts to reorganize the department in order to meet those cuts and address other budget issues in the future. He reiterated that he had to keep those 11 positions in the CCPD budget for next year. Director Zimmerman interjected that he understood; however, he felt this five (5) year plan needed to be tracked in some way. He then questioned if the goal was still for five (5) years and was the plan to try and play catch up in next year's budget process. Chief Halstead indicated that it was going to have to be made up in the next the four (4) years now. Director Zimmerman indicated that he felt it needed to be very visible as the CCPD Board of Directors had already made the commitment to do so. Director Espino indicated that he joined in the comments made by Directors Zimmerman and Jordan. He indicated that he did not feel that the CODE BLUE Program had been very successful with the bilingual portion of the community. He indicated that he would like to see a plan since the funding for the CODE BLUE Program was going to be reinstated. He added he felt a plan was needed to determine how to reach out to the bilingual community. He pointed out that one of the opportunities was through the area churches or thorough the schools. He added that those people feel very comfortable in those institutions. Director Espino stated, secondly, that the City of Fort Worth was a growing city. He stated that there were many parts of the City in the new growth areas where a police officer had to cover a lot of ground. He knew that the Chief had put together in his department a strategic plan, but there were still not enough police officers. He indicated that he felt the CCPD Board of Directors and the Fort Worth City Council needed to determine what was the strategic goal in the number of police officers that the City wanted out on the streets and how would the City get to that number. He indicated that they had been talking about it for years. He pointed out that the City staff and the City Council had been committed to increasing the number of police officers on the street. He added that the City CITY OF FORT WORTH CRIME CONTROL AND PREVENTION DISTRICT BOARD June 15, 2010 Page 16 of 22 Discussion and Consideration of the FY 2011 CCPD Budget (cont'd) (Agenda Item IV) Public Hearing (cont'd) had been very fortunate to be able to hold the line down on crime; but obviously until the City got the road infrastructure in certain areas up to par; and, as the City continued to experience growth, it was obvious that more police officers would be needed. He added that he continued to be concerned about the Homeland Security issue and he thought that the City had grants to fund that program and positions; however, Chief Halstead had indicated otherwise. He pointed out that the board of directors still needed to get to the plan to reduce the costs that belong in the City's General Fund Budget. Director Espino added that he wanted to make sure on the Comin' Up Program, which had been very effective, that those reductions were not going to impact that program. He added that he was relying on staff and would support those reductions provided that the Comin' Up Program continued to be an effective gang intervention program. He pointed out the Chief s quarterly report that was given at the Pre Council meeting about how successful the plan had been to reduce the gang crime in the City by a total strategy of prevention, intervention and enforcement. He added that as a part of the budget discussions overall he wanted to see a graphic trend line of how many police officers the City has had for the last few budget cycles, what the goal was for the City of Fort Worth and what does the Police Chief and the City recommend for the number of police officers in the City and how would the City get there. Chief Halstead talked about their Hispanic CODE BLUE members. He recognized Police Officers Daniel Segura as well as Joseph DeLeon. He pointed out that they had a record number of the Hispanic community wanting to participate in their recent Citizens Police Academy. He advised that they had standing room only in their recent class. He pointed out that, in turn, they were gaining some of them as active CODE BLUE members. He indicated that they had just launched a Hispanic Facebook Page, with Officer Segura working on the page. He added that technology is slowly reaching out. Chief Halstead added that within the first 60 days of the new fiscal year, the department had two (2) important priorities: the budget and reorganization of the patrol staffing. He stated that within the first 60 days, the CCPD Board of Trustees would have that line item to see not only what he had determined that they needed but also what the entire organization felt they needed as a staffing assignment for the next four (4) years keeping it within the current strategic plan. With no other individuals wishing to speak before the directors, the public hearing was closed. CITY OF FORT WORTH CRIME CONTROL AND PREVENTION DISTRICT BOARD June 15, 2010 Page 17 of 22 Discussion and Consideration of the FY 2011 CCPD Budget (cont'd) (Agenda Item IV) President Moncrief indicated that the floor was open for a motion to restore the $41,000 to the CODE BLUE line item in the budget and add an additional $15,000 for the CODE BLUE campaign for retention and recruitment. Action MOTION: Upon a motion made by Director Hicks and seconded by Director Zimmerman, the board of directors voted nine (9) "ayes" and zero (0) "nays" to restore the $41,000 to the CODE BLUE budget line item and to add an additional $15,000 to the CODE BLUE line item to be utilized for a recruitment and retention campaign and with those funds ($55,000) to be taken from the CCPD fund balance. The motion carried unanimously. MOTION: Upon a motion made by Director Zimmerman and seconded by Director Hicks, the board of directors voted nine (9) "ayes" and zero (0) "nays" to approve the FY 2011 CCPD Budget as amended. The motion carried unanimously. President Moncrief advised that the FY 2011 CCPD Budget would be forwarded to the Fort Worth City Council for consideration and for the first public hearing to be held on July 13, 2010 and the second hearing to be held on August 3, 2010 and final action on August 3, 2010. Assistant City Manager Tom Higgins explained that it was still the City staffs intention that once the budget was adopted to come back to the board of directors and have a comprehensive discussion on the fund balance. He pointed out that the board of directors was able to go forward with the FY 2011 budget without changing that policy. He pointed out that there was a recruit class that was funded in the subject budget but what the City staff heard from the directors was that they wanted the City staff to expand the recruiting class and they wanted to have a comprehensive discussion on the fund balance, which could be done. He also talked about the action of the City Council to approve the City's General Fund Budget for next year and how that would affect the Police Department. President Moncrief commended the police staff for a well -prepared budget document, which was easily understood and the numbers reflect the priorities that the CCPD Board had indicated were important to them. CITY OF FORT WORTH CRIME CONTROL AND PREVENTION DISTRICT BOARD June 15, 2010 Page 18 of 22 Discussion and Consideration of the FY 2011 CCPD Budget (cont'd) (Agenda Item IV) Action (cont'd) Director Hicks indicated that she wanted to tell Assistant City Manager Higgins that she would appreciate the discussion on the fund balance issue as it was different than what was dealt with as a City Council Member and what was appropriate and what worked. She expressed her concern for the appropriate number of police officers for the City to have that was the size of Fort Worth. She pointed out that comments from Chief Halstead that the City was holding its own in a difficult economy; however, the City needed to keep a careful watch on what was going on. She added that she was reminded of the City 20 years ago when it was a difficult time when they had so much violence. She emphasized that she did not want them to get back to that point in time. Director Hicks referenced the criticism that the police were receiving about the overtime being utilized and expressed her concerns with what was supposed to be done when the City was not adding additional officers. She added that as they went through the discussion regarding the fund balance, she hoped that they continued to be very cognizant of the issues of recruitment and getting the police officers on the ground in a city that was growing both in square miles added to the City by annexation and the number of people still moving to the City. Director Espino indicated to Assistant City Manager Higgins that he was confirming and joining with Director Hicks in concerns for the number of police officers needed in the City, with Director Jordan on the fund balance and recruiting class and the issues raised by Director Zimmerman as to how the police officer positions would be transitioned from the CCPD to the City's General Fund. He asked for clarification as to whether that transition was going to be part of the City's General Fund budget discussion or considered separately. Assistant City Manager Higgins stated that in response to Director Zimmerman's request, the next time that the CCPD Board met they would want to see a schedule of this police officer transition from the CCPD Budget to the City's General Fund Budget. He added that simple math was 20% of the positions per year; however, that was not going to work with the City's budget challenges. He indicated that the staff would come back and show the board of directors how they had planned to get there. He stated once a decision had been made by the board of directors as to what they wanted to do, and if that was to reduce the percentage kept in the fund balance, then this would create additional funding that could be used for recruiting classes, or other things. He pointed out that the CCPD Board had not had a lot of flexibility yet in looking at things that they wanted to do. He advised that this board had inherited a good program but the directors had not really had the opportunity to look at certain issues. He reiterated the consideration of the fund balance and that decision would perhaps now give them that opportunity to have extra funds that could be used for the recruiting classes or other things that CITY OF FORT WORTH CRIME CONTROL AND PREVENTION DISTRICT BOARD June 15, 2010 Page 19 of 22 Discussion and Consideration of the FY 2011 CCPD Budget (cont'd) (Agenda Item IV) Action (cont'd) have not been considered in the past. Mr. Higgins added that at their next meeting they would have ideal numbers that they obtained from several models; they would have the information on the transition and have a comprehensive discussion about the fund balance at the next meeting. Director Jordan pointed out that obviously some of this was the relation between the City's General Fund and the CCPD funds. He pointed out that he felt it needed to be looked at in total. He stated that some of his earlier questions revolved around this issue. He pointed out that he thought that in the General Fund Budget there was a figure of $4.5 million for the upcoming 2011 Super Bowl. He stated that he felt there was a relationship between how overtime was currently handled and the saturation point that City Manager Fisseler had talked about. He stated that was at what point where the police officers were working so much overtime that they were creating a safety problem for the officers. He added that frankly the overtime for the Super Bowl was going to be an additive to the security to the City of Fort Worth. He clarified that he felt there needed to be a discussion on the use of overtime to fill new officer positions. He indicated there needed to be a separate discussion at the City Council level on how the staffing would be handled, how the overtime would be handled and the reimbursement for the Super Bowl costs from the State of Texas. Director Jordan pointed out that the City could not afford not to do it right. President Moncrief indicated that he felt they had adopted a sound budget. He added that there were always opportunities to make budget adjustments depending on what their decisions were at a later date. He added that he felt everyone was going to look forward to an in-depth discussion about the fund balance and better understand what the opportunities were and what the challenges were going to be as they moved forward. Director Zimmerman indicated that he wanted to hear from the Chief of Police and staff on the community -based programs. He pointed out that Director Moss wanted more money for those programs. He requested an evaluation of whether that money was better spent on those programs or doing other things that they were trying to do with the CCPD budget. President Moncrief indicated that Director Zimmerman's request could be considered under the "Future Agenda Items." The discussion and action were completed on this agenda item. CITY OF FORT WORTH CRIME CONTROL AND PREVENTION DISTRICT BOARD June 15, 2010 Page 20 of 22 Citizen Comments (Agenda Item V) President Moncrief opened the floor for citizen comments. Camille Drinan, 5737 Fair Wind Street, Fort Worth, Texas 76135, spoke before the directors on the change in the structure of the CCPD Board of Directors. She stated that the citizens had re-established the crime tax with the promise of the existing CCPD Board of Directors that they had at the time. She pointed out that terminology of the "Fort Worth Way" and that meant in her opinion being straight forward, above board and direct with the citizens. She added that when the City Council decided to make this change in the board of directors' composition, for whatever reason, this hurt the citizens because they were very satisfied with the work that the volunteer citizens group did. She added that she felt, that even though the City Council was very good and they knew what was going on in the City, they put a burden, which another group carried very well, now on each of the City Council Members. She added that she was not 100% against the City Council doing this; however, she felt that they had a much better system that really worked. She added that she hoped that she would never say this again, but she was still hurt that the City Council made this change away from the previous board of directors, because they had done an excellent job. She added that she appreciated their consideration of the Citizens on Patrol and the Citizens Police Academy Association (CPAA). She added that she wanted the CCPD Board of Directors and the City Council to consider using the volunteers in matters that they already pay others to do and they will probably do it for nothing just to give back to the City as they have been doing since the programs have started. She expressed her appreciation for the time to speak and thanked the board of directors. Director Jordan requested further clarification from Ms. Drinan. He indicated that the board of directors was talking about recruiting new COP members and getting them trained. He pointed out that one of the issues was involving more members of the community in the COP program, which was extremely effective. He added that what he was hearing from her was that there were feelings among some members that they were being under utilized. Ms. Drinan stated that fortunately she has had good captains that use their COP members as much as they can in other areas. She clarified that it was the CPAA members. She pointed out that in other smaller Metroplex cities; they used their groups to make warrant calls, to do data entry, input traffic tickets into the computer system, etc. She stated that it was things that used to be outsourced were now being handled by CPAA members to save those cities monies. She identified those cities were Euless and Bedford and that hundreds and thousands of dollars were being saved for those cities by the use of their volunteers. She pointed out that in a large city like Fort Worth, this could save a lot of money also. She added that when the City had citizens that wanted to be a part of the city government in small ways or give back to the City, and they were ignored then they don't feel like they were actually being appreciated even though they were given appreciations. She added that they all had talents. She stated that in the past that she had CITY OF FORT WORTH CRIME CONTROL AND PREVENTION DISTRICT BOARD June 15, 2010 Page 21 of 22 Citizen Comments (cont'd) (Agenda Item V) actually keyed in traffic tickets to help the City catch up and she was doing it as a temporary and getting paid to do so. She added that she would do it as a volunteer because it was something that needed to be done in order to bring in additional revenues into the City. She added that she could also do warrant telephone calls to people who have outstanding tickets in the City. She clarified that not all of the members were willing to help in this way as they just take the training and receive the payment for the training. She also pointed out that in the past they use to do a lot of things; however, due to decisions by the City Manager and the City Attorney, it was determined that there were associated liability issues. She indicated that she was sure that there were liability issues; however, she felt there were ways around those issues. Director Jordan requested further clarification as to whether this under utilization was regionalized, across the City or localized. She responded that it was across the City. She referenced the statistics regarding the reimbursement of mileage for travel; she stated that COP members were not going out as much or as often. She stated that some were going out for longer periods of times as they were dedicated people. She indicated that she based every Sunday and she had from one to four groups between 2:00 p.m. and 8:00 p.m., which go out on a regular basis. She indicated that COP had I00's of volunteers in her area alone and she was the captain of four groups and she could not get people to respond to her e-mails unless they wanted something free. President Moncrief and Director Jordan expressed appreciation to Ms. Drinan. President Moncrief pointed out that the board of directors only had a few meetings and he asked that she give them a chance before making a decision on their work. Director Jordan interjected a request that the Law Department provide an informal report (IR) to the CCPD Board of Directors on the restrictions on the use of volunteers for support thorough the COP in an official capacity. There was no one else wishing to address the board of directors. Future Agenda Items (Agenda Item VI) President Moncrief opened the floor for future agenda items and pointed out a previous request by Director Zimmerman. Director Zimmerman reiterated that he wanted to see more information on the community -based programs in order to assess their value and whether the City was getting its money worth. He pointed out that as he reviewed the information, it appeared to be the same program groups coming back with the same requirements, with a different tag to it. He added he just wondered if the City was getting its money's worth from these programs. CITY OF FORT WORTH CRIME CONTROL AND PREVENTION DISTRICT BOARD June 15, 2010 Page 22 of 22 Future Agenda Items (cont'd) (Agenda Item VI) Director Scarth requested that the Law Department look into whether the CCPD funding could be used for other crime initiatives that were done by other departments on special activities. He pointed out for an example the code enforcement programs. The discussion was concluded on this agenda item. Adiourn (Agenda Item VII) With no further presentations or discussions, President Moncrief adjourned the regular meeting of the Crime Control and Prevention District Board of Directors at 7:55 p.m., on Tuesday, June 15, 2010. These minutes approved by the Crime Control and Prevention District Board of Directors on the 24`h day of August, 2010. APPROVED: Mike Moncrief, President Minutes Prepared by and Attest: Marty Hendrix, S retary