Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAboutCOM 0353.000 2006-2008 GOJNtY Oi New, lt-` Harry Kim Dixie Kaetsu Mayor Managing Director Barbara Kossow 4T•'Qi'NP~ Deputy Managing Director ~ountp of ~omai`i 891 Ululani Street • Hilo, Hawaii 96720 • (808) 961-821 I Fax (808) 961-6553 KONA: 75-5706 Kuakini Highway, Suite 103 Kailua-Kona, Hawaii 96740 (808)329-5226 Fax (808)326-5663 April 16, 2007 The Honorable Pete Hoffmann, Chairperson, and Council Members = r-i , Hawaii County Council ~ ~ 333 Kilauea Avenue Hilo, Hawaii 96720 Re: Police Fleet Vehicle Recommendation Dear Chairperson Hoffmann and Council Members: , ~ ~r~ In 2006, the Council sent the report of the Police Fleet Implementation Working Group to the administration for the preparation of a draft implementation plan. Numerous meetings were held with the Police Department, Finance Department, and my office to consider and evaluate the most effective way of implementing a fleet program that will enhance public safety. This is an issue made more complex by union contract issues, recruitment concerns, and Fair Labor Standazds Act (FLSA) requirements. As you will recall, the County was sued and settled an FLSA lawsuit recently, and we must be very cognizant of the requirements of this federal law. Attached is a report to the Council that includes background, analysis of various options, and the administration's recommendation on how to proceed. The goal of a police fleet vehicle program is to enhance and maximize public safety, and it is believed that this can be best accomplished through a hybrid program of pooled and subsidized vehicles. The $1 million provided in the current year's budget for transition to fleet vehicles is being utilized to purchase 20 marked vehicles. An additional $1 million is proposed in next yeaz's budget to continue this process. We look forward to answering any questions you have about this administrative recommendation. Al Kim MAYOR Attachment 2> S 2j Comm. IJo.- cc: Lawrence Mahuna, Police Chief Ref. To: C' ~ Ref. Uate AFR_.___ 2 0 2~OL Bill Takaba, Finance Director Hawaii County is an equal opportunity provider and employer. PART I -Background Review of what has been done so far In September of 2004, the Hawaii County Council passed Resolution 224-04 creating a Police Fleet Implementation Working Group. The mission of this group was to `prepare a written implementation plan and identify all costs associated with the purchase, operation and maintenance of a completely county-owned police fleet and/or, if deemed appropriate, partial county-owned fleet. " The Working Group completed its report and submitted it to the County Council in December of 2005. On January 19, 2006, the Council's Committee on Public Safety and Parks and Recreation closed file on the report and transmitted it to the Mayor with a request that the Administration prepare a drafr implementation plan for consideration by the Council. Further correspondence from Committee Chair Bob Jacobson on Februazy 16, 2006 and Apri125, 2006, indicated an understanding on the part of the Council of the complexity of the various factors and issues that must be taken into consideration in the development of a plan to move toward aCounty-owned fleet of police vehicles. There was no time frame given for a response from the Administration. Since last spring, the Finance Department, Police Depaztment, and my staff have been reviewing the report of the Working Group and examining other information to arrive at a proposal that we feel is the best for the County of Hawaii. It is important to note that part of this process included necessary discussions with SHOPO, the union representing police officers. The whole process has taken longer than we would have wished, but because this is such an important issue with far-ranging consequences for public safety as well as fiscal responsibility, it was felt that we could not rush the discussions and analysis. Working Group recommendations The recommendation of the Police Fleet Implementation Working Group was that the County phase in a complete County-owned police fleet of 369 vehicles over a five year period, beginning with the purchase of 50 vehicles, and the corresponding phase-out of subsidized personal vehicles. It was also recommended that County-owned maintenance facilities in Hilo, Kona and Waimea be established to provide maintenance of these vehicles. Administrative review After the Working Group report was sent to me for development of a draft implementation plan, the first step was to determine what the goal of a County-owned fleet would be. In other words, to agree on what we aze trying to achieve by this program. After discussion with the Police Department and the Finance Department, the determination was that enhanced and maximized public safety is the goal we aze trying to achieve. While fiscal factors must be considered to the extent that anything proposed Police Fleet Vehicle Recommendation Page 1 of 7 must be affordable, the driving force is what will make our Police Department most effective in achieving its mission. This was our "guiding light" in developing the proposal contained in this correspondence. Budget Due to the Charter-mandated timing of the County's budgetary process, the current year budget was prepared before a decision could be made on the implementation of a fleet program. However, an appropriation of $1 million is included in the FY2006-07 budget to begin the process of conversion to some sort of fleet program. PART II -Recommendation Guiding principles To achieve the goal of enhanced and maximized public safety, the following are the guiding principles that provided the overall context for our review of the various alternatives: • Enhanced public safety is the driving force behind this effort • The best program from a public safety perspective may not be the cheapest program • Standard marked police vehicles provide higher visibility than unmarked vehicles • Higher visibility is perceived to provide more deterrence of crime • There are times when "unmarked" vehicles are more advantageous to a mission • Any program adopted must have the support of police officers to be effective • Any program adopted must not negate the good points of the present system Summary of Administrative recommendation The County of Hawaii should acquire County-owned police vehicles for use in each district of the island. These pooled vehicles should be based at the police station in each district and used by each shift in turn. Officers will continue to receive a vehicle allowance for providing a subsidized police vehicle which will be taken home. The smaller number of vehicles necessary under this scenario should make it possible to contract with private auto repair shops for maintenance and repairs. This should be established on a trial basis immediately, utilizing the $1 million appropriation in this year's budget to purchase marked vehicles. Analysis To come to this recommendation, the advantages of a pooled fleet where a vehicle is assigned to a different officer each shift vs. a take-home fleet vs. subsidized vehicles were considered. Pros and cons of each alternative are listed below; however, the Police Fleet Vehicle Recommendation Page 2 of 7 discussion for each includes only the major points considered in concluding whether the alternative is viable. Pooled /leet Pro: Fewer vehicles will need to be acquired since they are shared Standard police vehicles will be more visible to the public Con: County loses "rapid response" capability ofpresent system County will be responsible for repairs, maintenance May have a detrimental impact on police recruitment for fiscal reasons: * The vehicle allowance is seen as an attractive `fringe benefit" * Ofacers will have to shoulder entire cost of commuting to their duty station, often at some distance Discussion. The conclusion of the Working Group on a pooled fleet is supported. The report states that take-home vehicles provide rapid deployment capability, and that is an advantage that should not be sacrificed in the implementation of any change in policy. The earthquakes of October 15, 2006, clearly demonstrate the advantage of all police officers being able to respond from their homes and go to work immediately. In emergency situations where roads may be blocked and access impeded, a system where officers would have to report to their duty stations (often in a different district from where they reside) to pick up a police vehicle before being able to go to work would not be acceptable. Therefore, a pooled fleet to replace the present subsidized vehicle system is not acceptable from a public safety perspective, even without consideration of the other pros and cons shown above. Take-home 11eet Pro: "Rapid response" capability is preserved Standard police vehicles will be more visible to the public Con: More costly because more vehicles will need to be acquired than under a pooled fleet program County will be responsible for repairs, maintenance Labor/union/FLSA issues occur if off cers take care of assigned Counry- owned vehicle (wash, etc.) at home Officer will not have a vehicle to use when his assigned vehicle is undergoing maintenance or being repaired May have a detrimental impact on police recruitment for fiscal reasons: * The vehicle allowance is seen as an attractive ';fringe benefit" Discussion. This scenario, which is the recommendation of the Working Group, preserves the "rapid response" capability, which is recognized as a key component in any program for public safety reasons. However, this plan may have a negative impact on public safety in another area, that of recruitment and retention of police officers. The Police Fleet Vehicle Recommendation Page 3 of 7 Police Department has been challenged for several yeazs to find enough qualified applicants to fill its vacancies. Due to collective bazgaining requirements, the County cannot offer higher pay for beginning officers to try to attract more applicants. The vehicle allowance is seen by many as an attractive "fringe benefit" that translates into more pay to assist the officer in purchasing a vehicle that can be used for personal use also. To eliminate any financial incentive at this time, when it is already hazd to hire officers, is counter to public safety because it may contribute to even more difficulty in filling vacancies. A second major area for much consideration is the maintenance requirements of a take- home fleet. This program would have the County acquiring at least 400 vehicles. The Working Group report concludes that adoption of this program should include the creation of County-owned maintenance facilities in Hilo, Kona and Waimea. These would be necessary because there aze no private maintenance and repair facilities of the scale necessary to keep a fleet of this size on the road. These would be major fiscal commitments, both the initial capital cost as well as the ongoing staffing and operations. An additional consideration is that the Working Group report looks at the County purchasing one fleet vehicle per officer. There is no consideration of what an officer will do when his vehicle is undergoing routine maintenance or being repaired. To accommodate this concern, additional fleet vehicles will need to be purchased to be available as needed to avoid the situation where an officer is unable to be out on the road patrolling and answering calls when his vehicle is in the shop. It is uncertain how many extra vehicles would be necessary to cover this eventuality, as there is no record of experience in this area. At this time, it is felt that atake-home fleet to replace the subsidized vehicle program is not conducive to enhanced and maximized public safety. Subsidized vehicles Pro: "Rapid response" capability is preserved Offcer is responsible for maintaining his own vehicle, and if it is under repair, responsible for providing another vehicle for work No negative impact on police recruitment for fiscal reasons Con. Subsidized vehicles are not as visible to the public as marked vehicles Discussion. This is the "status quo" option. It preserves all of the advantages of the present system, including the "rapid response" capability. The one drawback is the issue of visibility. Therefore, continuing with only the present system does not address the identified "guiding principles." Police Fleet Vehicle Recommendation Page 4 of 7 Recommendation After the above analysis, the conclusion was that to achieve the goal of enhancing and maximizing public safety, a "hybrid" system combining the present subsidized vehicle system with a pooled vehicle fleet would be the best program. Hybrid svstem ofj~ooled and subsidized vehicles Pro: "Rapid response" capability is preserved Both fleet and unmarked vehicles will be available for use, depending on what is best for the mission No negative impact on police recruitment Con.• More expensive than present system County will be responsible for repairs/maintenance of pooled vehicles Discussion. This option is the only one that complies with all identified "guiding principles." It maintains the advantages of the present subsidized system, while adding the component of a pooled fleet so that marked police cars can be on the job 24/7. The subsidized vehicles will continue to be used when it is advantageous to have an unmarked vehicle for an assignment and when the County-owned vehicles are in the shop for maintenance or repairs. Since the number of pooled marked vehicles will be smaller than atake-home fleet of marked vehicles, it is anticipated that existing car dealerships and repair shops may be able to handle the necessary maintenance, eliminating the need to establish island-wide County-owned maintenance facilities. It is acknowledged that this system will be more expensive than some other options because the present cost to the County for officers' car allowance will continue in addition to the cost of purchasing marked vehicles. However, given that enhanced and maximized public safety is the goal, this is the price to be paid for adopting the system that will best meet that goal. PART III -Implementation First year trial The budget for the current fiscal year (FY2006-07) includes an appropriation of $1 million to begin implementing a fleet of marked vehicles. The Police Department has submitted to the Purchasing Division a requisition to buy 20 marked vehicles. Vehicles of two types will be acquired: sedans for use in urban/highway settings, and SUVs for use in districts with rougher roads and terrain. These will be special police edition vehicles equipped specifically for police use. Police Fleet Vehicle Recommendation Page 5 of 7 For this proposed pilot program, the number of marked vehicles will obviously not be lazge enough to provide one to every officer while he is on duty. The Police Department will determine the most effective way of allocating the vehicles to the various districts, keeping the goals of the prograzn in mind. The use of the mazked vehicles will focus on high priority and high visibility missions, such as patrolling on roads and highways, and use in areas with large numbers of visitors who aze not familiaz with our unmarked police cazs. It is recommended that this be established as a trial program, and its effectiveness be monitored and evaluated. Issues to be evaluated include the frequency of maintenance necessazy to keep vehicles on the road the maximum time; the turn-azound time when a vehicle is in the shop for repairs or maintenance; and the effectiveness of marked vehicles on regular patrol in terms of visibility and effectiveness. Evaluation of program Beginning at the time of delivery and acceptance of the first marked vehicles, cone-year evaluation period will begin. At the end of this period, the Police Department will provide an analysis of the program, looking at fiscal, operational, and other factors as indicators of the program's effectiveness. Examples of the type of factors to be evaluated include: Fiscal: The cost factors of marked fleet vehicles will be analyzed, including ancillary costs such as maintenance, replacement of tires and normal "weaz and teaz" items, insurance, damages and cleaning. All maintenance and cleaning will be outsourced, and warranty items will be replaced or fixed by vendor. Operational: The effects of these high visibility cars on traffic enforcement and special projects will be assessed. Other: The degree of support this program receives from the police officers on the beat will also be considered as a morale factor. The evaluation of the program will be provided to both the Mayor and the County Council. Subsequent years In the budget submitted for next year, FY2007-08, another $1 million is included to continue the implementation of this trial program. If the evaluation of this trial program does indicate that it provides the expected benefits, annual appropriations to increase the number of mazked police vehicles in the pooled fleet will be made until the size of the pooled fleet is adequate to support use by patrol officers on a daily basis. If it is assumed that $1 million is set aside annually to purchase mazked vehicles, it may take four or five years to reach this point. Until the first vehicles Police Fleet Vehicle Recommendation Page 6 of 7 are on the road and experience shows the level of regular maintenance needed for maximum use, the total number of vehicles that will be necessary to fully implement this program cannot be determined. PART IV -Conclusion In conclusion, the recommendation to the County Council is to adopt a hybrid program that continues the present subsidized police vehicle system and adds the enhancement of a pooled fleet of marked police vehicles that will be based at each police station. These pooled vehicles will be used daily by various shifts in turn, thereby maximizing the effectiveness of each marked vehicle purchased by the County. This is the only program that fully addresses all of the "guiding principles" identified earlier, and is best way of meeting the goal of enhancing and maximizing public safety. Police Fleet Vehicle Recommendation Page 7 of 7