ATTACHMENT A
Public Safety Plan Update
PUBLIC SAFETY PLANUPDATE
JANUARY 2026 FIVE YEAR PUBLICSAFETY UPDATE
Executive Summary
The following points are intended to
summarize and highlight key points found
in this 5-year Public Safety Plan update.
1 Measure P has generated approximately $124
million
Public safety staffing increased from 198 to 280
employees, representing a 41% increase
Police Department staffing levels have increased
from 128 to 142 employees, representing an
11% increase
Police response times have been reduced
significantly for all non-emergency call types
Traffic citations have increased from 1,535 to
7,523, a 390% increase
Reported traffic collisions have reduced from 5,022 to 3,065, a 39% reduction.
Fatal traffic collisions have declined from 26 to 15, a 42% decline Fire Department staffing levels have increased from 55 to 93, a 69% increase Expanded fire and medical services by opening station 315 and adding medic engine 315, medic squad 312, and medic squad 315
Fire and medical responses increased by 2,607 calls, an 11.35% increase Code Compliance staffing levels increased from 8 to a total of 25, which allowed for an increase in its caseload from 3,127 to 9,272 cases, a 200% increase Animal Services expanded its staffing levels by 13 employees, allowing for it to enhance its service delivery by opening and operating an Animal Sheltering and Adoption Center
Animal Services caseload has increased from 12,377 to 13,996, a 13% increase A 170-bed wellness and recuperative care facility was constructed and began operations
5-Year Public Safety Plan Update 2
Background
In November of 2019, the City Council directed staff to prepare a comprehensive plan for improving public safety and options for generating revenue toward that end. This resulted in the Public Safety Plan that was presented to the City Council in May of 2020 (Appendix B). This plan focuses on means of improving public safety with a n emphasis on Police, Code Compliance, Animal Services, and Fire. As a part of this plan, staff made several recommendations regarding staffing and budgeting needs to ensure the levels of service matched the increasing population in the City of Victorville. Most importantly, staff recommended implementing a 1% Gener al Transaction and Use Tax which could be used for enhanced public safety, public library improvements, public park improvements and improved fiscal target reserves. This resulted in a ballot measure in November of 2020 wher e Measure P was voted on and app roved by the residents of Victorville.
Since taking effect in April of 2021, Measure P has enabled the City to increase public safety and expand essential services like Police, Fire, Code Compliance, Animal Services, Community Services, and Homelessness Solutions. Since its implementation, the City has received an average of approximately $28 million annually in Measure P funding. The 2020 Public Safety Plan provided options for proactive efforts, including, but not limited to:
• A recommended increase of 30 full-time personnel to transition the local police force to a more proactive patrol and a traffic enforcement agency, while dramatically reducing non- emergency response times, as well as rea lignment of the beat system for higher priority needs.
• Hiring nine (9) additional Fire Department members and opening Fire Station 315. • Hiring an additional six (6) staff members for Code Compliance , and expanding services such as street parking, City park patrol, vacant property registration, and proactive weed abatement.
• Hiring an additional six (6) staff members for Animal Services and extending operating hours, as well as improving field operations and licensing.
This report serves as an update to the 2020 Public Safety Plan, providing details on what the City has accomplished in response to the recommendations made, as well as additional accomplishments that have resulted from Measure P funding.
Budgeting
Measure P funding has been instrumental in the City successfully expanding services across Police, Fire, Code Compliance and Animal Services. In ten (10) years, the expenditures for these departments have more than doubled as funding has become more availa ble and as costs of services increase. As a result of the funding available through Measure P , the City has also 5-Year Public Safety Plan Update 3
successfully increased the General Fund Reserve target from 15% to 17% and implemented a Measure P Reserve target to match.
*2021-2024 reflect years in which Measure P funding was available. **Expenditures spiked in 2019 due to start up costs associated with reinstating the Victorville Fire Department, after previously contracting service with the San Bernardino County Fire Protection District. Contract services were paid through March 2019 for San Bernardino County’s service.
$32,842,679
$34,252,124
$35,491,136
$37,497,364
$39,004,018
$45,881,652
$41,639,373
$44,861,314
$49,221,357
$61,104,966
$68,240,428
$-
$10,000,000
$20,000,000
$30,000,000
$40,000,000
$50,000,000
$60,000,000
$70,000,000
$80,000,000
PUBLIC SAFETY ANNUAL EXPENDITURES
5-Year Public Safety Plan Update 4
While Police and Fire have much larger operating budgets and needs due to the nature of the work performed, Measure P has made it possible for Code Compliance and Animal Services to expand their operations without the General Fund being impacted.
Population and Staffing Trends
Due to the City of Victorville’s affordable housing, the population has steadily increased over the course of the last 30 years. Victorville’s growing residential base has created an exponentially greater demand for public servic es, including public safety. In the years prior to Measure P’s implementation, staffing increases were being far outpaced by population increases, causing the community to feel as if service levels had decreased despite staffing levels remaining the same.
The following tables show the trends over the last ten years with both population and staffing. $37,484,031
$17,088,825
$1,196,668 $886,765
2024 GENERAL FUND
EXPENDITURES
Police Fire Code Compliance Animal Services
$5,098,408
$3,163,402
$1,651,921
$1,690,404
2024 MEASURE P FUND
EXPENDITURES
Police Fire Code Compliance Animal Services
5-Year Public Safety Plan Update 5
As illustrated by the Population Trend chart above, the City of Victorville’s population has seen an increase of almost 18% over the course of the last ten years.
*Police data is not available for 2020 - 2022 due to the network disruption that affected the San Bernardino County Sheriff’s Department on April 7, 2023. Figures for 2023 only includes the months of August through December. 120,590
121,168
123,510
123,565
123,710
126,543
134,638
135,950
137,430
138,869
141,777
105,000
110,000
115,000
120,000
125,000
130,000
135,000
140,000
145,000
2014 2015 2016 2017 2018 2019 2020 2021 2022 2023 2024
POPULATION TRENDS
Population
1.45 1.55
1.50 1.51
1.51 1.45
0.29 0.34
0.32 1.00
1.37 0.00
0.20 0.40
0.60 0.80
1.00 1.20
1.40 1.60
1.80 2014 2015 2016 2017 2018 2019 2020* 2021* 2022* 2023* 2024
CALLS-FOR-SERVICE PER CAPITA
5-Year Public Safety Plan Update 6
*The Fire Department was contracted through the San Bernardino County Fire Protection District from July 2008 through March 2019.
**2021-2024 reflect years in which Measure P funding was available.
Over these same ten years, staffing remained relatively stagnant – even decreasing in some years – until the implementation of Measure P in 2020. Between 2020 and 2024, staffing increased by 39% across Police, Fire, Code Compliance, and Animal Services, increasing service levels and addressing community demands for public safety.
FY
2014*
FY
2015*
FY
2016*
FY
2017*
FY
2018*
FY
2019* FY 2020 FY
2021**
FY
2022**
FY
2023**
FY
2024**
Animal Services 6 6 6 6 7 7 7 8 10 11 20
Code Compliance 10 10 10 10 9 8 10 14 24 24 25
Fire 72 67 63 63 54 55 59 60 69 80 93
Police 124 124 125 125 128 128 127 139 141 142 142
TOTAL 212 207 204 204 198 198 203 221 244 257 280
STAFFING TRENDS
5-Year Public Safety Plan Update 7
Police
The San Bernardino County Sheriff’s Department (SBCSD) has provided contract law enforcement services for the City of Victorville since 1962. These services are augmented by several divisions, including Aviation, Training, Specialized Investigations, Scientific Investigations, Specialized Enforcement, Coroner, Gangs, and Narcotics.
$19,675,063
$20,633,419
$21,600,422
$22,793,215
$23,821,370
$25,831,885
$27,216,577
$29,352,385
$28,424,549
$34,723,463
$37,484,032
$2,105,604
$2,432,658
$5,098,408
$0
$5,000,000
$10,000,000
$15,000,000
$20,000,000
$25,000,000
$30,000,000
$35,000,000
$40,000,000
$45,000,000
POLICE EXPENDITURES
General Fund Measure P
$30,530,153
$37,156,121
$42,582,440
5-Year Public Safety Plan Update 8
The Victorville Police Station is currently located at 14200 Amargosa Road and serves as headquarters for the Victorville Police Department. Due to the constrained space at this station, the City has been limited in its ability to increase staff ; however, have successfully increased staffing by nearly 15% in the last ten years, with an almost 11% increase in staffing since 2019.
**2021-2024 reflect years in which Measure P funding was available.
Additionally, the City has implemented an 8 -Beat Patrol System, as recommended in the 2019 Public Safety Plan, allowing deputies to patrol smaller geographic areas and allow for a more proactive approach to service.
86 88
89 88
91 91
92 97
98 98
98 37
36 36
37 37
37 35
42 43
44 44
0 20
40 60
80 100
120
140
160
POLICE DEPARTMENT STAFFING LEVELS
Sworn Non-Sworn
124
124
125
125
128
128
127
139
141
142
142
5-Year Public Safety Plan Update 9
*Data is not available for 2020 - 2022 due to the network disruption that affected the San Bernardino County Sheriff’s Department on April 7, 2023.
**2021-2024 reflect years in which Measure P funding was available. ***Figures for 2023 only include the months of August through December due to the network disruption.
As a result of the increased staffing made possible through Measure P , the response times for priority calls have decreased since 2019, as well. The following two charts summarize the time it takes for a Priority 2 -4 call to be a ssigned to a deputy upon being received by dispatch and the time it takes for the deputy to report to the scene.
30,061
31,816
25,031
24,056
23,034
21,070
17,154
17,844
116,489
125,354
128,960
128,624
126,473
123,300
78,556
127,710
146,550
157,170
153,991
152,680
149,507
144,370
95,710
145,554
-
20,000
40,000
60,000
80,000
100,000
120,000
140,000
160,000
180,000
2014 2015 2016 2017 2018 2019 2020* 2021** 2022** 2023*** 2024** CALLS-FOR-SERVICE: PROACTIVE VS.
DISPATCHED
Proactive Calls Dispatched Calls Total
5-Year Public Safety Plan Update 10
0:23:19
0:20:11
0:28:36
0:49:54
0:52:08
0:57:34
0:49:38
1:19:32
0:47:00
0:36:00
0:33:21
0:29:07
0:37:07
1:06:15
1:14:25
1:14:39
0:52:10
1:21:32
0:51:00
0:39:00
0:37:38
0:31:15
0:41:58
1:17:22
1:15:45
1:16:28
0:54:24
1:31:56
0:47:00
0:39:00
2014 2015 2016 2017 2018 2019 2020 2021 2022* 2023 2024
RESPONSE TIME - RECEIVED TO DISPATCH
Priority 2 Priority 3 Priority 4
0:16:29
0:15:15
0:16:16
0:19:46
0:20:16
0:23:02
0:22:07
0:23:10
0:18:00
0:17:00
0:16:26
0:15:35
0:17:56
0:20:50
0:22:15
0:23:57
0:21:36
0:23:51
0:17:00
0:17:00
0:17:08
0:16:16
0:17:35
0:20:32
0:23:14
0:26:26
0:21:18
0:21:46
0:14:00
0:14:00
2014 2015 2016 2017 2018 2019 2020 2021** 2022* 2023** 2024**
RESPONSE TIME - DISPATCHED TO ON-SCENE
Priority 2 Priority 3 Priority 4
5-Year Public Safety Plan Update 11
*Data is not available for 2022 due to the network disruption that affected the San Bernardino County Sheriff’s Department on April 7, 2023.
**2021-2024 reflect years in which Measure P funding was available.
All priority levels can apply to the same type of call. The information being relayed could change the priority response level. For example:
• Priority 2 – Incidents in which the suspect is out of the area, but a delay in response would cause a loss of evidence. This type of call could also be a burglary where the suspect has fled the scene, but evidence of the suspect is available and needs to be gathered quickly. • Priority 3 – Incidents in which the suspect is out of the area and delay would not cause a loss of evidence. This type of call could include vandalism property crimes. • Priority 4 – Incidents in which the suspect is out of the area and the existence of evidence is unlikely. This type of call includes stale crimes, such as someone leaving for vacation and coming home to find vandalism or burglary.
As a part of the increase d staffing made possible through Measure P , five (5) additional Sheriff’s Service Specialists (SSS) were hired, bringing the total number of SSS to 16. The SSS support the Police Department by handling public contact, routine reports, evidence, and adminis trative tasks, acting as a liaison between the community and deputies. The SSS are able to handle Priorty 3 and 4 calls, which alleviates the Deputies to respond to the higher priority calls. As a result of this increased staffing and deliniation of tasks, response times have decreased considerably.
**2021-2024 reflect years in which Measure P funding was available.
7107
3337
2710
3697
2114
1535
3918
3215
4806
4200
7523
0 1000
2000
3000
4000
5000
6000
7000
8000
2014 2015 2016 2017 2018 2019 2020 2021** 2022** 2023** 2024**
TRAFFIC CITATIONS ISSUED
5-Year Public Safety Plan Update 12
The 2020 Public Safety Plan largely attributed to the increasing response times to traffic and the distance traveled by officers to report to the scene. The 8 -Beat Patrol System that was implemented has alleviated these issues, giving officers smaller geographical areas to cover and thus decreasing respon se times considerably. This has also realligned staff to better cover the Traffic Division, increasing the number of traffic citations issued since 2019 by over 390%. Along with the increased number of citations, the increased enforcement and proactive pat rols have also influenced driving behavior, causing the number of traffic collisions, including those with fatalities to trend downward. In addition to the enhanced traffic enforcement, targeted concentration events have heightened Police visibility, there by creating a more noticeable presence.
**2021-2024 reflect years in which Measure P funding was available.
3850
4225
4760
4788
5045
5022
2813
3348
2780
3208
3065
0 1000
2000
3000
4000
5000
6000
2014 2015 2016 2017 2018 2019 2020 2021** 2022** 2023** 2024**
TRAFFIC COLLISIONS
5-Year Public Safety Plan Update 13
**2021-2024 reflect years in which Measure P funding was available.
The goal for departmental growth remains , and in order to address this, the City has utilized Measure P funds in addition to $3,700,000 discretionary funding from the San Bernardino County to acquire land for a new Victorville Police Station and Civic Plaza. In addition to these funding sources, the City has established a capital reserve account in which $4,000,000 has been added annually since Fiscal Year 2023. The 2020 Public Safety Plan recommended an increase in staffing for the Police Department; however, it did not identify the need for expanding the Police Station.
The current Police Station was constructed in 2001 and is a 15,828 square-foot single-story facility.
As staffing has nearly doubled since 2001, the size of the building has remained the same. In addition to the constrained building space, the parking lot is limited to approximately 114 parking stalls, making it difficult to add new personnel. These physical constraints are negatively affecting the ability to add additional members to the Police Department. Thus, the City is currently in the design of a new Police Station that will provide over 44,000 square -feet of building space and over 300 parking stalls. This project has an expected completion date of 2028.
16 9
12 21
18 26
25 31
36 19
15 0
5 10
15 20
25 30
35 40
2014 2015 2016 2017 2018 2019 2020 2021** 2022** 2023** 2024**
FATAL TRAFFIC COLLISIONS
5-Year Public Safety Plan Update 14
Fire
At the time of the Public Safety Plan in May of 2020, the City of Victorville’s Fire Department had transitioned back to Victorvile Fire on March 30, 2019, after over ten years of contracted services from the San Bernardino County Fire Protection District (SBCFPD). At the time of transition, it was discovered that facilities and apparatus had not been maintained properly and thus required increased investment to successfully support the new ly reinstated Victorville Fire Department.
The Public Safety Plan made recommendations not only to increase staff , but to also address repairs and upgrades to the facilities, apparatus, and other equipment.
*Expenditures spiked in 2019 due to start up costs associated with reinstating the Victorville Fire Department, after previously contracting service with the San Bernardino County Fire Protection District. Contract services were paid through March 2019 for San Bernardino County’s service. $12,440,620
$12,833,818
$13,052,939
$13,971,522
$14,327,311
$18,672,219
$13,200,423
$13,506,863
$15,544,374
$16,873,745
$17,088,826
$499,850
$3,188,636
$3,163,402
$0
$5,000,000
$10,000,000
$15,000,000
$20,000,000
$25,000,000
FIRE EXPENDITURES
General Fund Measure P
$16,044,224
$20,062,381
$20,252,228
5-Year Public Safety Plan Update 15
At the time that the Victorville Fire Department was reinstated, s taffing levels had shown a downward trend in the years that SBCFPD was contracted. Since 2019, the City has successfully increased staffing by over 69% as shown in the table below.
**2021-2024 reflect years in which Measure P funding was available.
Positions have been added to Suppression, Prevention, EMS, and Administrative Services within the department, addressing deficiencies to the level of service that were identified in the 2020 Public Safety Plan. With the increased staffing, the City was suc cessful opening Fire Station 315 in July of 2021, allowing the Victorville Fire Department to better respond to incidents and address the number of calls received.
72 67
63 63
54 55
59 60
69 80
93 0
10 20
30 40
50 60
70 80
90 100
FIRE DEPARTMENT STAFFING LEVELS
5-Year Public Safety Plan Update 16
*SBCFPD provided contracted services to the City from July 2008 through March 2019. **2021-2024 reflect years in which Measure P funding was available. ***Other calls include public service calls, assisting law enforcement, water leaks, smoke alarm or fire sprinkler activations, carbon monoxide alarms, down power lines, etc.
From 2019 to 2024, the Victorville Fire Department has seen an increase of over 11% in total calls received, making it the second busiest fire department in San Bernardino County. The variety and complexity of the target hazards within the City require resources and training that most agencies will not encounter. In order to address t he unique set of challenges the Fire Department faces, the City has utilized Measure P funding for purchasing apparatus equipment and other notable equipment listed in Appendix A.
In addition to these purchases, the City has made noteworthy changes to both staffing levels and necessary upgrades to each of the five fire stations operated by the Victorville Fire Department, addressing concerns raised in the 2020 Public Safety Plan.
Fire Station 311
Staffing at Fire Station 311 includes one (1) Battalion Chief, two (2) Fire Captains, two (2) Fire Engineers, and four (4) Firefighter Paramedics for a total of nine (9) personnel. 2014* 2015* 2016* 2017* 2018* 2019* 2020 2021** 2022** 2023** 2024** Other Calls*** 2,018 2,061 2,002 1,870 2,033 2,291 3,334 3,682 1,912 1,887 1,809 Fire Calls 585 715 772 867 881 967 1,608 1,975 1,993 2,012 1,994 Medical Calls 16,046 18,000 18,593 20,109 19,369 19,715 21,314 22,733 21,368 21,010 21,777 TOTAL 18,649 20,776 21,367 22,846 22,283 22,973 26,256 28,390 25,273 24,909 25,580 0 5,000
10,000
15,000
20,000
25,000
30,000
FIRE DEPARTMENT: CALLS FOR SERVICE
5-Year Public Safety Plan Update 17
Fire Station 311 houses the following apparatus:
Apparatus Purchase Year Fund Source Status Staffing
ME311 2023 ARPA Front Line Regular
MT311 2024 ARPA Front Line Regular
MS311 2023 ARPA Front Line Regular
WT311 2025 ARPA Front Line Cross Staffed – Wildland
R311 2018 General Fund Front Line Cross Staffed – All Hazards ME314A 2006 General Fund Reserve
Though not funded through Measure P , the City has leveraged the use of ARPA funding to purchase four (4) new front line apparatus since reinstating the Victorville Fire Department in 2019. Front line refers to any apparatus that is a primary res ponse vehicle for an identified Fire Management Zone. Reserve apparatus are maintained to backfill front line units when a primary response vehicle is out of service.
Utilizing funding available thr ough Measure P , the following repairs and upgrades have been made to Fire Station 311:
o ADA Compliant Restroom
o New Bay Doors
o HVAC Replacement
o Perimeter Fencing & Security Gate
o Ventilation Training Prop
o Training Room Remodel (Carpeting, Paint, Tables and Chairs) o Training Tower Paint
o Kitchen Remodel
Fire Station 312
Staffing at Fire Station 312 includes one (1) Fire Captain, one (1) Fire Engineer, and three (3) Firefighter Paramedics, for a total of five (5) personnel – a staffing increase of 66% since the 2020 Public Safety Plan. A medic squad was added to Station 312 with two (2) additional new positions in 2024 to enhance medical response times, ultimately relieving the front-line engines to be available for higher priority calls.
Fire Station 312 houses the following apparatus:
Apparatus Purchase Year Fund Source Status Staffing
ME312 2020 General Fund Front Line Regular
MS312 2023 ARPA Front Line Regular
OES6315 2020 State Funding Front Line Cross Staffed – Wildland OES6110 2025 State Funding Reserve Cross Staffed – All Hazards
5-Year Public Safety Plan Update 18
Though not funded through Measure P , the City has leveraged the use of alternate funding sources to purchase three (3) new front line apparatus and one (1) reserve apparatus since reinstating the Victorville Fire Department in 2019.
Utilizing funding available through Measure P , the following repairs and upgrades have been made to Fire Station 312:
o Northwest Bay Door Replacement
o HVAC Replacement
o Security Gate
Fire Station 313
Staffing at Fire Station 313 includes one (1) Fire Captain, one (1) Fire Engineer, and one (1) Firefighter Paramedic.
Fire Station 313 houses the following apparatus:
Apparatus Purchase Year Fund Source Status Staffing
ME313 2023 ARPA Front Line Regular
ME312A 2016 General Fund Reserve
Though not funded through Measure P , the City has leveraged the use of ARPA funding to purchase one (1) new front line apparatus since reinstating the Victorville Fire Department in 2019.
Utilizing funds available through Measure P , the following repairs and upgrades have been made to Fire Station 313:
o Security Gate
o Conceptual Design to Expand the Fire Station
Fire Station 314
Staffing at Fire Station 314 includes one (1) Fire Captain, one (1) Fire Engineer, and one (1) Firefighter Paramedic.
Fire Station 314 houses the following apparatus:
Apparatus Purchase Year Fund Source Status Staffing
ME314 2023 ARPA Front
Line
Regular
MT311A 2006 General Fund Reserve
ME314A 2005 Bond
Proceeds/SCLA
Reserve
5-Year Public Safety Plan Update 19
BE314 2019 General Fund Front
Line
Cross Staffed – Wildland
HM314 2018 General Fund Front
Line
Cross Staffed – Hazardous
Materials
Though not funded through Measure P , the City has leveraged the use of alternate funding sources to purchase two (2) new front line apparatus since reinstating Victorville Fire in 2019.
Utilizing funds available through Measure P , the following repairs and upgrades have been made to Fire Station 314:
o Security Gate
o ADA Compliance Restroom (in progress)
o Flooring & Carpeting (in progress)
Fire Station 315
The City opened Fire Station 315 in July of 2021 . Fire Station 315 was constructed in 2009, but never opened due to financial issues associated with the Great Recession.
New staffing at Fire Station 315 includes one (1) Fire Captain, one (1) Fire Engineer, and three (3) Firefighter Paramedics.
In 2021, Fire Station 315 opened with a medic engine staffed by three (3) personnel. In 2024, a medic squad was introduced at Fire Station 315, adding two additional positions each shift to improve medical response times and ensure that front -line engines at Fire Station 313 and 315 are available for higher priority calls.
Fire Station 315 houses the following apparatus:
Apparatus Purchase Year Fund Source Status Staffing
ME315 2020 General Fund Front Line Regular
MS315 2023 ARPA Front Line Regular
Though not funded through Measure P , the City has leveraged the use of alternate funding sources to purchase two (2) new front line apparatus since reinstating Victorville Fire in 2019.
Utilizing funds available through Measure P , the following repairs and upgrades have been made to Fire Station 315:
o Security Gate
o Exterior Lighting
o New Fuel Pump/Tank
5-Year Public Safety Plan Update 20
To ensure fire suppression and emergency service coverage in the City of Victorville aligns with national standards and industry best practices, continuous investment in personnel, operations, apparatus, and facilities is essential. With the support of Mea sure P , the City can maintain and enhance the services provided by the Victorville Fire Department.
5-Year Public Safety Plan Update 21
Code Compliance
In 2019, the Victorville City Council began considering a change to its Code Enforcement approach. This approach considered transitioning from a strictly complaint based reactive response to a more proactive enforcment in reaction. The change in approach was motivated by resident complaints at the time about an increasing disregard for code compliance. Typical Code Compliance cases identified at the time include those indentified on page 40 of the 2020 Public Safety Plan (Appendix B).
Code Compliance has seen exponential growth both in staffing and tasks that they are responsible for. This is as a result of a 683% increase in the funding available for these services since 2019.
5-Year Public Safety Plan Update 22
*Data is not available for 2014-2018
Since the 2020 Public Safety Plan, staffing has increased by over 212%, giving the City the ability to deploy a team with the specific goal of reducing homelessness and addressing issues with the City’s homeless population. The Homeless Engagement Taskforce (HET), which was established in April of 2021 as a result of Measure P funding, consists of five staff members – four (4) Code Compliance Officer II’s and one (1) Supervisor – who are able to focus on this specific task as a result of increased staffing throughout the department as a whole. Code Compliance staffing levels consist of an Official, one (1) Manager, three (3) Supervisors, 14 Code Compliance Officers, and four (4) Administrative Staff, as well as Sanitation staff that are funded through Measure P and regularly assigned to assist the Code Compliance Department with homeless encampment cleanups, community cleanups, illegal dumping, and tire dump abatements. $363,779
$567,992
$801,533
$789,862
$951,335
$1,196,668
$514,858
$1,251,909
$1,651,922
0 500000
1000000
1500000
2000000
2500000
3000000
CODE COMPLIANCE
EXPENDITURES
General Fund Measure P
$1,304,720
$2,203,244
$2,848,590
5-Year Public Safety Plan Update 23
**2021-2024 reflect years in which Measure P funding was available.
As a result of increased staffing, Code Compliance has also successfully expanded operations to seven days per week with hours of operation until 6 p.m. on Sundays and 8 p.m. on all other days, to improve public services to the community . Code Compliance has implemented a proactive approach to enforcement that was unattainable prior due to constrained staffing levels.
**2021-2024 reflect years in which Measure P funding was available. 10 10
10 10
9 8
10 14
24 24
25 0
5 10
15 20
25 30
CODE COMPLIANCE STAFFING LEVELS
2014 2015 2016 2017 2018 2019 2020 2021** 2022** 2023** 2024** Homeless Encampment 303 394 789 1,149 1,607
Proactive 413 344 352 347 458 764 1,977 2,574 3,383
Reactive 2,852 3,320 2,753 3,149 2,122 2,780 3,033 3,799 2,549 2,940 4,282 TOTAL 2,852 3,320 3,166 3,493 2,474 3,127 3,794 4,957 5,315 6,663 9,272 0 1,000
2,000
3,000
4,000
5,000
6,000
7,000
8,000
9,000
10,000
CODE COMPLIANCE CASES
5-Year Public Safety Plan Update 24
The total number of annual cases has nearly tripled since 2019, with a more than 875% increase in proactive cases. Before adopting a proactive approach, Code Compliance addressed homeless encampment complaints solely on a reactive basis. However, since the implementation of Measure P , the HET is now fully dedicated to managing these complaints. The HET also completed 695 field surveys of the homeless population in 2024, determining whether they are eligble for services such as placement at the City’s Wellness Center.
This approach to proactive enforcement has supported the goal of focusing on community and commercial appeal, investigating environmental complaints, and reducing community blight.
*Data is not available for 2014-2017.
**2021-2024 reflect years in which Measure P funding was available.
Roll over cases are those that are carried over from the prior year s that have not yet been concluded. This number fluctuates based on the availability of personnel, case priorities, and types of cases received.
In addition to increased staffing in Code Compliance, the City has also utilized Measure P funds to purchase new and upgraded equipment and offer additional training opportunities for staff, as listed in Appendix A.
With increased staffing and new technologies to assist, the City has successfully increased the enforcement of homelessness, unlicensed rental properties, blight, illegal dumping, marijuana grows, tobacco regulations, land use issues, street parking, FOG compliance, and firework nuisance. Increased staffing has also made it possible to increase patrols to seven days per week, including on-call support to our Fire and Police Departments. 199
1183
2853
3545
3607
4122
4523
0 500
1000
1500
2000
2500
3000
3500
4000
4500
5000
2014* 2015* 2016* 2017* 2018 2019 2020 2021** 2022** 2023** 2024**
CODE COMPLIANCE ROLL OVER CASES
199
5-Year Public Safety Plan Update 25
Animal Services
Similarly, Animal Services has more than doubled its expenses since 2019 with Measure P funding.
This has increased the number of staff, giving the City the opportunity to open and operate its own Animal Care and Adoption Center after the closure of the shelter run by Victor Valley Animal Protective League (VVAPL) closed in April of 2023. Prior to the VVAPL closure, Victorville Animal Services principally involved responding to the need to collect and transport animals to the VVAPL shelter. Since April of 2023, Victorville Animal Services established temporary sheltering facilities at City-owned facilities until it was able to adopt a more permanent shelter and adoption center at the former Goodwill High School in December of 2024.
$727,006
$898,854
$837,775
$732,626
$855,367
$1,013,776
$978,380
$1,200,513
$1,280,865
$1,236,865
$886,766
$51,396
$447,169
$1,690,404
$0
$500,000
$1,000,000
$1,500,000
$2,000,000
$2,500,000
$3,000,000
ANIMAL SERVICES
EXPENDITURES
General Fund Measure P
$1,332,261
$1,684,034
$2,577,170
5-Year Public Safety Plan Update 26
**2021-2024 reflect years in which Measure P funding was available.
From 2019 to 2024, staffing increased from 7 to 20, representing a 185% increase. The 185% increase in staffing includes the addition of six (6) part -time staff members hired to assist with the new Animal Care and Adoption Center. The increased staff has not only given Animal Services the ability to operate their own facility, but also put an emphasized focus on adoptions, fostering, licensing, and increase the number of cases handled.
6 6
6 6
7 7
7 8
10 11
20 0
5 10
15 20
25 ANIMAL SERVICES STAFFING LEVELS
5-Year Public Safety Plan Update 27
*Inspection data is not available for 2014-2016.
**2021-2024 reflect years in which Measure P funding was available.
Staff has successfully managed to complete 17% more inspections annually since 2019 with the additional staff available to respond to issues throughout the City. Inspections include the following enforcement types:
o Abandoned Animal
o Animal Noise (barking, roosters, etc.)
o Animal Sales (breeding, etc.)
o Bites
o Care and Clean
o Containment
o Dead on Arrival
o Animal Locked in Vehicle
o Firework Induced Barking and
Containment
o Animal Hit by Car
o Injured Sick Animal
o Licensing
o Loose Leash Violation
o Nuisance Animals
o Owner Turn In
o Prohibited Animals
o Sheriff Assist
o Snake
o Tethering
o Waste
o Welfare Check
o Wellness Center Calls (Issues with
Wellness Center Client Pets)
Staff has also increased the number of cases handled by 5% since 2019. Case types include all animal-related inspections and enforcement activities, including those listed above.
In addition to increased staffing in Animal Services, the City has also utilized Measure P funds to purchase new and upgraded equipment for staff, listed in Appendix A. 2014* 2015* 2016* 2017 2018 2019 2020 2021** 2022** 2023** 2024** Citations Issued 95 193 580 269 265 205 85 164 205 243 359 Inspections Completed 1,133 6,248 6,742 4,663 6,735 7,396 6,532 7,884 AC Cases 6,413 6,574 6,696 5,923 5,457 5,430 3,971 5,410 6,300 5,144 5,703 TOTAL 6,508 6,767 7,276 7,325 11,970 12,377 8,719 12,309 13,901 11,919 13,946 0 2,000
4,000
6,000
8,000
10,000
12,000
14,000
16,000
ANIMAL SERVICES CASES
5-Year Public Safety Plan Update 28
This is in addition to not only the lease and rehabilitation of the former Goodwill High School for use as a shelter, but also the equipment needed for this functionality. In order to utilize this site as a shelter, the plumbing system required upgrades and former classrooms had to be retrofitted with plumbing systems for above ground kennels. Additionally, all HVAC systems, broken windows, restrooms, and flooring required repairs and the roof of the administrative building needed to be replaced. Measure P f unding was utilized for this project and also allowed Animal Services to purchase 130 stainless steel above ground kennels for sheltering operations and cleaning power equipment for their maintenance. In order to move Animal Services staff and equipment to this site for their daily operations, the network communications systems and infrastructure needed to be upgraded and security enhancements, such as a solar/cellular powered security system and parking and fencing improvements were completed utilizing Measure P funds as well.
To date, the Victorville Animal Care and Adoption Center has successfully adopted 1,201 animals since taking over sheltering operations.
5-Year Public Safety Plan Update 29
Community Services
While an important goal for Measure P was to increase public safety, Ordinance 2409 establishing the General Transaction and Use Tax listed the purpose of the tax as unrestricted revenue to be spent on essential municipal services including, without limitation, recreational facilities and parks. The City has utilized Measure P funding to expand services to our growing population within Community Services. As a part of these efforts, the City has successfully completed the following projects with funding from Measure P:
o Floor Refinishing at the Westwinds Sports Center and Hook Community Center Gyms o Installation of three (3) Shade Structures at Brentwood Park o Installation of a 24-hour Remote Library Kiosk at Sunset Ridge Park o Installation of an Inflatable Obstacle Course at Doris Davies Pool o Demolition of Dilapidated Structures at Center Street Park and Doris Davies Park o Tennis Court and Pickleball Court Resurfacing at Sunset Ridge Park o Parking Lot Resurfacing at Several Parks
o Replastering Doris Davies Pool
o Self-Cleaning Restrooms at Center Street Park and Brentwood Park The ability to upgrade our existing facilities through Measure P funding has made it possible to offer our community better experiences when visiting City parks and facilities.
5-Year Public Safety Plan Update 30
As a part of our efforts to expand services to our community, the City broke ground on a new library on May 22, 2024, expanding the blueprint of the existing Greentree Golf Course Clubhouse and converting existing structures to meet the needs of the projec t. This has been a highly anticipated project, as the existing Victorville City Library located at 15011 Circle Drive did not offer the square footage necessary to house library staff and the expanded programming we aimed to offer to our community. The new library, more than double the size of the existing library, will have a dedicated children’s library, multipurpose rooms, a maker’s space for hands - on creativity, a dedicated teen room, and more comfortable reading areas. This project has been made possible with grant funding from the State of California in addition to Measure P funding.
The anticipated grand opening of the new Victorville City Library is February 7, 2026.
5-Year Public Safety Plan Update 31
In addition to the projects completed utilizing Measure P funding, Victorville has also been able to purchase additional equipment for our Community Services and Public Works staff, listed in Appendix A.
5-Year Public Safety Plan Update 32
Homelessness and Housing
Homelessness is a societal problem experienced by many who call the City of Victorville home and has become prevalent in even the most affluent areas. An entirely new service made possible by Measure P , the City has implemented a dedicated team – Homelessness Solutions – to guide the efforts of preventing and addressing homelessness. This team is responsible for centralizing outreach initiatives, identifying and securing grant funding, and optimizing cross -agency collaboration to ensure those persons in need are connected with the services they need.
Utilizing funding from Measure P , the City began operations of a 92-bed interim shelter in the City’s Westwinds Sports Center. As a part of the Homelessness Solutions team’s efforts, the City was able to open t he first non-congregate care facility in the San Bernardino County, called the Victorville Wellness Center, which opened in December of 2023. With the opening of the Victorville Wellness Center, operations at the interim shelter were discontinued.
5-Year Public Safety Plan Update 33
The Wellness Center plays a critical role in helping sheltered and unsheltered individuals stabilize and rebuild their lives. It offers 170 interim housing beds, including family units, single and double occupancy rooms, and specialized recuperative care beds for those recovering after hospital discharge.
The total cost for the construction of the Wellness Center was $44,962,461. The majority of this funding came from Project Homekey, however additional funding was leverage d from various sources, as listed below:
Source: Amount:
Project Homekey Round 2 $23,612,058
American Rescue Plan Act of 2021 (ARPA) $19,413,472
Homeless Housing Assistance & Prevention (HHAP) $300,000 Community Development Block Grant (CDBG) $125,812
Permanent Local Housing Allocation (PLHA) Year 1 $599,589 Permanent Local Housing Allocation (PLHA) Year 2 $911,530 TOTAL $44,962,461
As a result of this funding, the City has been able to offer comprehensive support services to our homeless population, including case management and care coordination, job training and placement, legal services, housing navigation, behavioral health and recovery support.
The total operational cost of the Wellness Center annually is approximately $3,457,087. This was funded from the following sources:
Source: Amount:
Project Homekey Round 2 $1,518,045
ERF Round 3 $1,358,000
Kaiser $70,000
Measure P (Facilities Staff Wages) $197,059
Permanent Local Housing Allocation (PHLA) $313,983
TOTAL $3,457,087
The City has been able to leverage funding from multiple sources to fund the Wellness Center’s operating costs, but to ensure that no lapse in services occur, $1,600,000 is budgeted annually through Measure P funding as a backstop, should funding no longer be available elsewhere.
Since its opening in December of 2023, the Wellness Center has been instrumental in reducing the number of homeless individuals in the City of Victorville. Through outreach efforts, Homelessness Solutions has engaged with more than 85 0 individuals in the community experiencing homelessness and since opening, the Wellness Center has provided services to more than 800 individuals. In total, 1,135 unduplicated indiv iduals have been assisted or enrolled across all programs offered.
5-Year Public Safety Plan Update 34
* In 2021, due to the COVID-19 Pandemic, the Point-in-Time Count was not conducted and thus data is not available.
While figures have fluctuated over the last ten years, the number of unsheltered individuals has decreased dramatically. In the year between 2024 and 2025, unsheltered individuals decreased by more than 56%.
Notably, the City celebrated its 200 th graduate from the Wellness Center in November of 2025.
Teresa Massie, who had struggled with homelessness for many years, entered the Wellness Center in early 2025. While at the Center, Teresa received medical treatment for a behavior health disorder that contributed to her homelessness. She was paired with a case manager, who arranged for her personal care, support services, and training to help her gain stability and plan her transition into permanent housing.
Utilizing Measure P funding, The City has not only been able to increase staff to address homelessness both as part of t he Homelessness Solutions Team and the HET, but has been able to address concerns and offer solutions to homelessness that were not previously possible. 2014* 2015 2016 2017 2018 2019 2020 2021* 2022 2023 2024 2025 Unsheltered 127 198 81 187 179 298 224 317 326 141
Transitional Housing 27 29 12 28 21 21 63 71 53 44
Sheltered 107 37 39 48 133 132 168 219 232 263
0 100
200
300
400
500
600
700
VICTORVILLE STATISTICS: POINT-IN-TIME
COUNT
5-Year Public Safety Plan Update 35
Conclusion
The City of Victorville has made significant progress since the adoption of the 2020 Public Safety Plan and the approval of Measure P in 2020. Through this dedicated funding, the City has expanded staffing, enhanced facilities, invested in equipment, and implemented programs tha t directly improve the safety, health, and quality of life for residents. Police response times have improved, fire services have grown to meet increasing demand, and Code Compliance and Animal Services have expanded their reach to better serve the communi ty. Additionally, investments in Community Services, the Library, and Homelessness Solutions have provided long-term benefits that extend beyond public safety.
While much has been accomplished, the City recognizes that continued growth will require ongoing investment and planning. The construction of the new police station, potential future fire stations, expansion of the Animal Care and Adoption Center, and further park and community service improvements remain priorities. By maintaining a focus on strateg ic investments and responsible fiscal management, the City of Victorville can ensure that it not only meets current public safety needs but is also prepared to serve its growing population in the future.
Appendix A
Measure P funding has been utilized to purchase the following equipment:
Fire
Outfitting of Ten (10) Apparatus
Shoring Struts for Urban Search and Rescue (USAR)
Inflatable Boat for USAR
Ropes and Hardware Equipment for USAR
Search Camera for USAR
Cardiac Monitors
LUCAS CPR Device Equipment
Code Compliance
Nine (9) New Vehicles
Technology Equipment, Including Dash Cameras for Firework Enforcement Police HT Radios
Ballistic Vests
CIT & CA POST Training for Staff
Animal Services
One (1) Truck and One (1) Capture Box
77 Ready-to-Assemble Animal Kennels for Emergency Sheltering Operations Police HT Radios
Ballistic Vests
Community Services & Miscellaneous
Stage for Recreation & Special Event
Scissor Lift
Dump Trailer
Compacting Trash Truck
Pool Vacuum
Snowplow Attachment
New Vehicles Across Multiple Departments & Divisions
Appendix B
Public Safety Plan
May 19, 2020
Public Safety Plan Page 1
Table of Contents
EXECUTIVE SUMMARY ..................................................................................................................... 2-4 INTRODUCTION .................................................................................................................................... 4-5 TRENDS ................................................................................................................................................... 6-7 POLICE .................................................................................................................................................. 8-17 STAFFING LEVELS ................................................................................................................................ 9 CALLS ............................................................................................................................................... 11-13 TRAFFIC ........................................................................................................................................... 13-15 RECOMMENDATION ..................................................................................................................... 15-17 FIRE ...................................................................................................................................................... 18-38 STAFFING LEVELS .............................................................................................................................. 19 FIRE MANAGEMENT ..................................................................................................................... 20-29 APPARATUS ......................................................................................................................................... 30 FIRE RESPONSE .............................................................................................................................. 31-34 RECOMMENDATION ..................................................................................................................... 34-38 CODE COMPLIANCE & ENFORCEMENT................................................................................... 39-54 CODE COMPLIANCE CASES ....................................................................................................... 39-46 STAFFING LEVEL .......................................................................................................................... 46-49 NEEDS ASSESSMENT .................................................................................................................... 50-54 ANIMAL CARE & CONTROL ......................................................................................................... 55-65 ANIMAL CARE & CONTROL CASES ........................................................................................... 55-58 CURRENT STAFFING LEVELS ..................................................................................................... 58-62 RECOMMENDED STAFFING LEVELS ........................................................................................ 63-65 FINANCIAL ........................................................................................................................................ 66-74 PROJECTED CASH FLOW ............................................................................................................ 67-68 FUNDING OPTIONS ........................................................................................................................ 69-74 EXHIBIT A - A5................................................................................................................................ 75-80 EXHIBIT B – B3 ............................................................................................................................... 81-87 EXHIBIT C ........................................................................................................................................ 88-91
Public Safety Plan Page 2
EXECUTIVE SUMMARY
This document has been prepared at the direction of the Victorville City Council whereby the City Manager was directed to bring back for review and possible action, (1) a comprehensive plan for improving public safety with a particular focus on community p olicing, community police relations, code enforcement, animal control and fire, and; (2) a viable option or options for generating revenue with the goal of significantly enriching the quality of life for Victorville residents. This report considers public safety as providing protection to the general public and is expressed through municipal code compliance, crime prevention and the protection of life and property. In Victorville, public safety principally comprises police and fire services. Services tha t are integral to police and fire services include Code Enforcement and Animal Care & Control.
This report assesses levels of services, and offers advice on what staff and the City Manager believe is needed to adequately respond to the service level demands by its residents. Important highlights of this report are as follows:
• Over the last 20 years , population growth has nearly doubled with the greatest amount of growth between the years of 2000 and 2010 at approximately 7% annually and at approximately 1.3% annually from 2010 to 2019.
• Over the last 20 years, public safety expenditures have increase d at a rate of approximately 18% annually compared to 8% per year of general and property tax revenue and 1.6% annually in staffing levels.
• Police and Fire services alone comprise 64% of the City’s general fund. Including Code Enforcement and Animal Care & Control, that share increases to 66.45%. These shares of the general fund are increasing over time, reducing the amount available for other discretionary services such a recreation and library.
• Since 2008, Police total call volume increased 11% or by approximately 14,000 calls. • Since 2008, cost for Police service, which has grown at a rate of 4.2%, has outpaced the total Police personnel growth rate of less than 1%.
• Since 2008, dispatched calls for Police services have increased 30% while proactive calls have decreased by 40%, causing the Victorville Police force to be more reactionary to crime calls. • Since 2008, non-emergency response times for Priority 2 dispatched calls have increased by 42 - minutes, 54-minutes for Priority 3 calls and 56-minutes for Priority 4 calls.
Public Safety Plan Page 3
• Since 2008, traffic enforcement staff levels have remained relatively flat , however, service levels have decreased largely due to traffic enforcement being called to respond and support emergency patrol calls.
• Since 2010, traffic citations issued to motorists has declined by 67%. • Over the last 20 years, public safety staffing levels increased annually by 1.6% while cost of service increased by approximately 15% annually.
• A minimum increase of 30 full -time personnel is being recommended to transition the local police force to a more proactive patrol and a traffic enforcement agency , while dramatically reducing non-emergency response times.
• Since 2008, fire tooling, equipment, facilities and apparatus have been subjected to increased wear and tear, all requiring attention as Victorville operates its own fire department. • Since 2011, fire and medical calls for service increased by 49%, outpacing population grow th of 8%.
• Since 2011, medical calls for service have increased approximately 55%. • Since 2011, the share of medical calls to total fire service calls has increased from 82% to 86%. • A fire and medical service coverage gap exists in Fire Management Zone ( FMZ) 315, putting additional strain on available resources provided to FMZ 312 and 313. Supplemental medical services should be provided first at FMZ 313 until such a time as Station 315 can be re -opened with a fully staffed medic engine. This report recomme nds hiring nine additional fire service members and opening Station 315 in the 21/22 fiscal year. • Actual Code Compliance cases exceed caseload capacity of staff , creating delays in the time it takes to inspect, enforce and remedy Code Compliance cases. • Code Compliance staffing levels have remained relatively flat over the last 20 years, causing a reactive operating posture to enforce Code C ompliance matters. This report recommends an additional six staff members.
• Code Compliance case load is 45% greater th an the capacity available from existing staffing levels to attend to Code Compliance cases.
• Since 2010, Animal Control staffing levels have remained relatively flat while actual caseload has decreased. The decline in caseload activity is more directly related to the increased amount of time it takes to start and complete cases. Animal Control staffing levels are recommended to increase by six staff members to develop a more proactive response to Animal Control demands.
Public Safety Plan Page 4
• COVID-19 related revenue adjustments project a fiscal year 19/20 reduction of revenues by approximately $2.8 million and a $4.2 million projected revenue reduction in the 20/21 fiscal year as compared to the forecast from the current budget.
• Revenue enhancements were projected necessary to satisfy any expansion to public safety prior to the COVID-19 related pandemic and that revenue enhancement has been accelerated in timing if the City intends on expanding its public safety program. • To enhance its public safety levels, a general Transaction and Use Tax measure of 1% added to the existing 7.75% sales tax rate, is recommended to be added to the November 2020 general election for voter consideration.
INTRODUCTION
Victorville, over the last 30 years, has grown in population largely due to the affordable nature of its housing stock. Victorville, along with the entire Victor Valley, has traditionally exported its workforce “down-the-hill” where the larger employment centers are located , but remains focused on repositioning itself as a major employment center with its Southern California Logistics Airport. Notwithstanding its efforts to attract higher paying jobs and reduce its local commute shed to the larger labor m arkets of Southern California, Victorville’s growing residential base has created an exponentially greater demand for public services, including public safety services. Local governments in California, such as Victorville, rely on a relatively limited discretionary revenue source to fund general public services such as Police and Fire services. Among general discretionary revenue sources, sales and property taxes are the largest contributor to the City’s general fund. The growth rate of these revenue sou rces has been outpaced by the cost of services which has limited the ability of Victorville to expand its public safety service levels.
When this occurs, the net effect felt by any community is a reduction of service due to the growing demand for service.
Since 2008, Victorville has focused itself upon surviving the largest national recession felt since the Great Depression. Not until 2016 had Victorville consistently been in the position of building up its general fund reserve which is typically useful for cash flow management purposes, unplanned or emergency expenditures or to serve as a rainy day funding source. In fact, Victorville for the first time achieved its 15% general fund reserve target in 2019. Unfortunately, the spring of 2020 has introduced to the Victorville community, a global pandemic that will present many economic uncertainties in the near term, while the demand by its residents for increased public safety services grows. The ongoing pandemic has Public Safety Plan Page 5
not reduced the sound of Victorville voices as they have been increasingly asking for more public safety and community improvements such as parks and library enhancements.
This report pulls information and direct experience from key staff, including members of the Victorville leadership and executive team to summarize select trends that better help understand Victorville’s public safety service levels. This information is then compared to the financial resources generated from our community to satisfy public safety service levels so that this information can be used to assess the level of public safety services desired and the financial resources necessary from our residents to expand our public safety services. A fundamental fact or trend that has always been known to staff is that the cost of public services necessary to meet the service demands of its residents traditionally outpaces the revenues it generates. Accordingly, Victorville has found itself reducing service levels at times when fiscal constraint arises and it then attempts to catch up its service levels when fiscal conditions improve. This has kept Victorville from identifying the optimal service levels and maintaining them at pace with growth indicators.
The population figures summarized below in Tab le 1 reflect an approximate 96% increase in population in the last 20 years. This 96% increase represents an approximate 5% annual increase over the same 20 years. 74% of the population increase occurred between the years 2000 and 2010, at a rate of 7.4% annually. Over the same time period, public safety staffing levels as illustrated in Table 2 increased by a total of 32%, which represents an approximate 1.6% annual increase. Table 3 summarizes over the same time period an increase in public safety spending by $36.2 million which represents a 351% increase over the same time period and an annual average rate of approximately 18%. Altogether, the cost of service has outpaced the public safety service level growth. Over the last 20 years, staffing le vels increased annually by 1.6%. A continued trend in this direction, along with an expected increase in calls for service as population continues to grow, will cause the community to feel as if service levels decrease , despite staffing levels staying the same. Considering community demands for increased public safety, the forthcoming analysis summarizes existing service levels, recomme ndations to achieve the demands by our residents for increase public safety service levels and advice as to the necessary financial resources to accomplish the community’s goals.
Public Safety Plan Page 6
TABLE 1 – POPULATION TREND
TABLE 2 – STAFFING TREND
0 20,000
40,000
60,000
80,000
100,000
120,000
140,000
2000 2001 2002 2003 2004 2005 2006 2007 2008 2009 2010 2011 2012 2013 2014 2015 2016 2017 2018 2019 77,679
112,097
119,059
123,510 126,543
64,455
Public Safety Plan Page 7
TABLE 3 – PUBLIC SAFETY EXPENDITURE TREND
$-
$5,000,000
$10,000,000
$15,000,000
$20,000,000
$25,000,000
$30,000,000
$35,000,000
$40,000,000
$45,000,000
$50,000,000
2000
2001
2002
2003
2004
2005
2006
2007
2008
2009
2010
2011
2012
2013
2014
2015
2016
2017
2018
2019
Animal Care & Control
Code Enforcement
Fire
Police
Expenditures - Actuals
Public Safety Plan Page 8
POLICE
The San Bernardino County Sheriff ’s Department has provided contract law enforcement services for the City of Victorville since 1962. The Sheriff’s Department is the law enforcement agency for the largest geographical county in the nation. The department serves over 2.1 million residents, w ith eight county and 14 contract patrol stations.
The department is augmented by several divisions to include Aviation, Training, Dispatch, Court Services, Detentions, Specialized Investigations, Scientific Investigations, Specialized Enforcement, Civil Liabilities, Coroner, Gangs, Narcotics, Internal Affairs and Public Affairs. These augmented services are not found as direct charges in Victorville’s Schedule A, which is the detail explaining the local police force paid directly by the City. The Schedule A, approved by the Victorville City Council for the FY 19/20 can be found in Exhibit A.
The Victorville Station located at 14200 Amargosa Road serves as headquarters for personnel assigned to the Victorville Police Department. Personne l include sworn Deputy Sheriff’s and non -sworn Professional Staff. Personnel are outlined in Table A1 below and organized into several units and divisions: Patrol, Detectives, Gangs, Traffic, Multiple Enforcement Team (MET), Retail Theft, Adult Protective and Child Protective Investigations (APS/EPS), School Resource Officers (SRO), Crime Prevention, Media Relations and Administration.
TABLE A1 – POLICE DEPARTMENT CURRENT STRUCTURE
Victorville Sheriff’s Dispatch - 12
Crime Prevention Evidence
Media Relations Monitor Room
Automotive
Admin/Clerical
21 MET SRO
Gang Unit
16 DUI Enforcement
Traffic Unit
8 APS/EPS Retail Theft
Detective Unit
16 Dispatched Calls Proactive Calls
Patrol Unit
57 Command Staff
3 Victorville
Sheriff's Department
FY 19-20
Public Safety Plan Page 9
TABLE A2- STAFFING LEVELS
Beyond its primary role of protecting and serving, the Victorville Station attends m any community and charity events and supports various community groups by attending meetings as requested. Crime prevention and Media Relations personnel organize and teach classes on various topics throughout the year and support the Neighborhood Watch a nd Crime Free Housi ng programs. The Victorville Station does this in an effort to better connect with the community and to create a greater presence by officers throughout the community.
PATROL DIVISION
The largest division within the Victorville Station is the Patrol Divi sion. Patrol is principally responsible for responding to dispatched calls for service. Victorville Station deploys patrol personnel in twelve-hour shifts and is the only division staffed, 24 hours a day, seven days a week. Its shift structure consists of one dayshift and one nightshift with one cover shift to keep service levels sufficient during day and night shift rotations. A six -beat patrol system (Table A3) is utilized with one rover deputy on each side of the Interstate 15 freeway. This r esults in a minimum staffing level of eight Deputy Sheriffs per patrol shift.
Additionally, there is one Sheriff Service Specialist (SSS) assigned to each patrol shift. The role of the Patrol SSS’s is to provide “non-suspect” interface assistance to the pa trol deputy so that the patrol deputy can return to servicing calls as soon as possible.
-
20 40
60 80
100
120
140
SRO
Non-Sworn Dep
Sworn Dep
100
120
132
122
127
133
75 77 78
82 86
94 131 132 132 132
124 126 128 131
54 56
57 58
61 65
67 84
87 87
88 88
82 86
87 88
89 91
91 Public Safety Plan Page 10
TABLE A3 – BEAT MAP
Public Safety Plan Page 11
TABLE A4 – CALL VOLUME
Table A4 summarizes two categories of calls for service. A proactive call is one initiated by a deputy, an example of which may include a traffic stop. A dispatched call is either an emergency or non -emergency call that is generated by the 911 system or the dispatch center. Since 2008, dispatch ed calls increased a total of 30%, proactive calls decreased by 40% and total calls incre ased by 10%. From the data provided in Table A4, it is reasonable to consider that the reduction in proactive calls such as those generated by traffic stops is direct ly related to the shift in time required to respond to the more reactive dispatched calls. Calls for service are measured by response time based on the differing nature of each call for service. Calls for service can be measured by day of the week and by the time of day and the trend line of data supporting these calls for se rvice can be found in Exhibit A 4. Calls received and dispatched are assigned a priority level which is illustrated in Table A5.
0 20,000
40,000
60,000
80,000
100,000
120,000
140,000
2008 2009 2010 2011 2012 2013 2014 2015 2016 2017 2018 2019 35,383
29,525
24,402
24,410
25,055
31,200
30,061
31,816
25,031
24,056
23,034
21,070
95,004
97,515
98,715
101,077
109,731
108,772
116,489
125,354
128,960
128,624
126,473
123,300
Calls-For-Service: Proactive vs. Dispatched
Proactive Calls Dispatched Calls
Public Safety Plan Page 12
TABLE A5 – CALLS FOR SERVICE – PRIORITY DEFINITIONS
PRIORITY E 1 2 3 4
Emergency Incident: Emergency Incident: Non Emergency
Incident:
Non Emergency
Incident:
Non Emergency
Incident:
In progress or just
occurred
In progress or just
occurred
Past Incident Past Incident Past Incident Public
Service
Actual Personal
injury
No threat of injury No threat of injury No threat of injury No threat of injury Potential for injury Perpetrator still in
immediate vicinity
Perpetrator not in
immediate vicinity
Perpetrator not in
immediate vicinity
Perpetrator not in
immediate vicinity
Perpetrator still at
scene or in
immediate vicinity
Response:
Immediate, but
generally not Code 3
Possible
contamination or
destruction of
evidence
Contamination or
destruction of
evidence unlikely
No possibility of
evidence
contamination or
destruction
Response:
Immediate, generally
Code 3
Response: ASAP,
not to exceed one
hour
Response: ASAP
managed response,
could exceed one
hour
Response: Managed
response
C
H
A
R
A
C
T
E
R
I
S
T
I
C
S
The Victorville Police Department consistently responds to Priority E – Emergency Incidents, typically involving lights and sirens, i mmediately. However, all other priority level calls for service have seen an increase in response time. For illustrative purposes, Table A6 summarizes the trend in time it takes for Priority 2 -4 call , to be assigned to a deputy upon the call being received by dispatch , and Table A7 summarizes the trend in time it takes for the deputy to report to the scene.
TABLE A6- PRIORITY CALL RESPONSE TIMES- RECEIVED TO DISPATCHED
2008 2009 2010 2011 2012 2013 2014 2015 2016 2017 2018 2019 0:15:20
0:18:43
0:18:08
0:20:14
0:29:07
0:22:53
0:23:19
0:20:11
0:28:36
0:49:54
0:52:08
0:57:34
0:20:39
0:22:49
0:23:21
0:28:44
0:42:45
0:29:20
0:33:21
0:29:07
0:37:07
1:06:15
1:14:25
1:14:39
0:20:17
0:23:47
0:23:45
0:28:51
0:44:34
0:31:28
0:37:38
0:31:15
0:41:58
1:17:22
1:15:45
1:16:28
MINUTES
Response Time
Received to Dispatched
2 3 4
Public Safety Plan Page 13
Over the measurement period dating back to 2008, Table A6 illustrates an increase in time it takes to dispatch a call to an available deputy of approximately 42 minutes (275% approx. increase) for Priority 2 calls. It further illustrates that for Priority 3 calls, it took an a dditional 54 -minutes (258% i ncrease).
Priority 4 calls took an additional 56 minutes (280% approx. increase) to dispatch. Any form of delay in dispatching a call to a deputy has a direct correlation with all on -duty deputies attending to other priority calls, including higher priority calls.
TABLE A7- PRIORITY CALL RESPONSE TIMES- DISPATCHED TO ON SCENE
Table A7 above illustrates the trend in time it takes for an available deputy to actually respond to a call once it has been dispatched. For the priority types measured in Table A7, Priority 2-4 calls experienced an increasing amount of time to arrive on scene. Contributing factors to the increase in time to actually arrive on-scene include traffic and distance the dispatched officer h as to contend with while responding to the call. An important factor to know when viewing the call response time is that the time being measured is the time it takes from when the deputy is dispatched until the call is cleared. It is not uncommon for a patrol deputy to be dispatched to a non -emergency call, then get called off to a n emergency call, only to be re -dispatched to that originating non -emergency call at another time later in the day . The time measured in the tables above only measures the amount of time from when the deputy was re -dispatched to the non -emergency call, not from when the call was originally dispatched. This suggests the total response time being potentially greater than reported in tables A6 & A7.
TRAFFIC DIVISION
The Traffic Division is currently staffed with s even Deputy Sheriff’s, five specifically assigned to traffic enforcement and two for impaired driver enforcement. Traffic enforcement deputies work day shift during heavy traffic periods and im paired driver enforcement personnel ge nerally work during the evening; 2008 2009 2010 2011 2012 2013 2014 2015 2016 2017 2018 2019 0:14:42
0:15:40
0:16:39
0:16:13
0:17:30
0:16:10
0:16:29
0:15:15
0:16:16
0:19:46
0:20:16
0:23:02
0:15:45
0:15:58
0:16:51
0:17:51
0:18:25
0:16:18
0:16:26
0:15:35
0:17:56
0:20:50
0:22:15
0:23:57
0:15:10
0:16:35
0:17:32
0:17:11
0:19:02
0:17:03
0:17:08
0:16:16
0:17:35
0:20:32
0:23:14
0:23:26
MINUTES
Response Times
Dispatched to On-Scene
2 3 4
Public Safety Plan Page 14
however, traffic deputies can adjust their schedule based on the needs of the city. Since 2008, and based on employee accounts, the number of deputies assigned to traffic has decreased . This reduction , combined with a common occurrence that traffic deputies spend more time on scene at the increasing number of traffic collisions, or get called off traffic to assist with emergency priority calls, directly correlates to the overall reduction in traffic citations issued (Table A8). The statistics described in Tables A9 and A10 show an increasing trend dating back to 2010 of total traffic collisions. The tables also show that the total number of traffic collisions began to increase after the red light cameras were removed in 2015. Collectively, Tables A8-A10 illustrate a need to influence a change in driving behavior, which could be accomplished through increased enforcement.
TABLE A8 – TRAFFIC CITATIONS
TABLE A9 – TRAFFIC COLLISIONS
4700 4382
5872
4437
7107
3337
2710
3697
2144 1535
0 1000
2000
3000
4000
5000
6000
7000
8000
2010 2011 2012 2013 2014 2015 2016 2017 2018 2019
TRAFFIC CITATIONS FOR VICTORVILLE CITY
TRAFFIC CITATIONS FOR VICTORVILLE CITY
3721 3618 3815 3698 3850 4225
4760 4788 5045 5022
0 1000
2000
3000
4000
5000
6000
2010* 2011* 2012* 2013* 2014* 2015* 2016 2017 2018 2019 Victorville City Traffic Collisions
Traffic Collisions *Red Light Cameras
Public Safety Plan Page 15
TABLE A10 – FATAL TRAFFIC COLLISION
SPECIAL ASSIGNMENTS
The Multiple Enforcement Team (MET) consists of 4 deputies dedicated to special or priority assignment by its Captain. MET is currently assisting the City crack down on ill egal marijuana grows and homeless related matters.
RECOMMENDATION
As a known financial consideration , the County and the sheriff’s employee union approved a new labor contract in August 2019, for its employees for FY 19/20 to FY 24/25. This labor contract increases Victorville’s annual contract by an estimated 5% annually with an estimated aggregate increase of more than $7 million over the 5 -year term. This known increase over the next 5 years, does not consider any increased staffing level. Assuming a continued increasing trend in both population and calls for service, Victorville should expect a continued decrease in proactive call response , and an increase in the number of dispatched calls. An increased number of dispatched calls will increase response times to all levels of priority calls. An increased number of dispatched calls and response times can lead to an increased demand to rely on traffic patrol to assist with dispatched calls , which then can reduce the level of tr affic enforcement on Victorville city streets.
Considering the information provided above, staffing recommendations are being made available in a tiered approach. The tiered approaches focus on realigning the current beat pattern Victorville deputies patrol, from a 6 -beat system to a 10 -beat system. Beat realignment should focus first on the busiest of 15 17
19 8
16 9
12 21
18 26
0 5
10 15
20 25
30 2010 2011 2012 2013 2014 2015 2016 2017 2018 2019
VICTORVILLE CITY FATAL TRAFFIC COLLISIONS
Fatal TC
Public Safety Plan Page 16
patrol beats, creating geographically smaller beats, which adds additional personnel to serve areas of the city with the highest demand. To be successful in improving traffic enforcement and patrol response times, beat realignment relies heavily upon an increased use of Sheriff Service Specialists (SSS’s). SSS’s are intended to be used for matters that involve non -suspect contact and may be related to lower p riority calls so as to improve response time to lower priority calls , and free up deputies for higher priority needs.
Examples of SSS’s responsibilities may include but are not limited to taking reports when suspects are not present, collecting evidence, c losing traffic lanes during traffic collisions and active crime scenes, enforcing parking violations and towing vehicles. A baseline minimum service level recommended is an 8-beat system.
8-BEAT PATROL SYSTEM
Under an 8 -Beat system, Patrol Beats #3 and #5 would be separated into geographically smaller patrol beats. To staff an 8 -Beat system, the department would have to increase its full-time personnel by thirty (30). The distribution of personnel would include the following:
1- Sergeant
17- Deputy Sherriff
11- Sherriff Service Specialists (Non-Sworn)
1- Crime Analyst (Non-Sworn)
Among the positions listed above, ten deputies would be assigned to the Patrol Division. Among the ten (10) deputies assigned to the patrol division, five (5) deputies would be assigned to each of the two new patrol beats (Beat 7 & 8). In addition to the ten (10) patrol deputies, nine SSS’s would be assigned to support the Patrol Division functions. With curren t staffing levels, the additional S SS’s will bring a total of three (3) SSS’s for each patrol shift and one SSS for counter reports at the police station. The 8-Beat System would further add to the Traffic Division, five (5) deputies and two (2) SSS’s. The role of the SSS’s that are assigned to the traffic division will be to assist in attending to traffic collisions and parking enforcement which is a workload that traffic deputies are currently attending to that contribute to the reduced levels of traffic enforcement. Two (2) deputies would be assigned to the Multiple Enforcement Team (MET), creating a six (6) person MET to better attend to the specialized needs of the community that are intended to improve response and enfo rcement of quality of life matters. Finally, for investigative matters, the Victorville Police Department relies on the use of a crime analyst that is a shared resource within the entire County’s Sheriff Department. To improve response and attention to inv estigative matters, Victorville’s call volume and type justify a dedicated criminal analyst to serve as support to deputies and detectives serving the department. A dedicated crime analyst will be housed in the Victorville Police Station and collocated with deputies and detectives assigned to the Victorville Station.
Public Safety Plan Page 17
Compared to the FY 19/20 Schedule A charge for services of $27.25 million found in Exhibit A, Exhibit A1 summarizes an estimated total cost of $33.2 million to operate an 8 -Beat System. That change in cost of service represents an estimated $5.98 million increase in the cost of service over current levels.
9-BEAT PATROL SYSTEM
A 9-Beat Patrol System assumes everything that is in an 8 -Beat Patrol System; however, it would divide patrol beats 3, 4 and 5 into geographically smaller beats and add an additional six (6) deputy sheriffs. The six deputy sheriffs would be assigned to the newly created patrol beat and include one Sergeant and five deputies. Compared to the FY 19/20 Schedule A c harge for services of $27.25 million found in Exhibit A, Exhibit A2 summarizes an estimated total cost of $34.77 million to operate a 9 -beat system. That change in cost of service represents a $7.52 million increase in the cost of service over current levels.
10-BEAT PATROL SYSTEM
A 10-Beat Patrol System assumes everything that is in a 9 -Beat Patrol System; however, it would divide patrol beats 2, 3, 4 and 5 into geographic ally smaller beats and add an additional six (6) deputy sheriffs.
The six deputy she riffs would be assigned to the newly created patrol beat and include one Sergeant and five deputies.
Compared to the 19/20 Schedule A charge for services of $27.25 millio n found in Exhibit A, Exhibit A 3 summarizes an estimated total cost of $36.66 millio n to operate a 10 -beat system. That change in cost of service represents a $9.41 million increase in the cost of service over current levels.
Public Safety Plan Page 18
FIRE DEPARTMENT
On January 16 th, 2018, the Victorville City Council voted to approve resumption of a city run fire department and directed staff to begin formation. Victorville Fire had been in operation from 1926 until staffing was contracted out to San Bernardino County Fire Protecti on District (SBCFPD) in 2008. The actions taken to resume operations were the result of a thoughtful year long process that began in 2017, studying fiscal, operational and community impacts and future options. A motivator for the City to reactivate its own Fire Department was its ability to operate for less money when compared to the then known and projected costs of the SBCFD service contract. In addition to cost savings, Victorville believed that it could enhance its quali ty of service to its residents. As evidenced in transition reports conducted by Fire Department staff, it became evident that in addition to providing fire service at a lesser cost, the facilities and apparatus had not been maintained properly thus requiring increased investment by Victorville as it continues a newly transitioned Fire Department
On March 30, 2019, the City officially transitioned its fire service from the SBCF PD to its own Fire Department. In doing so, Victorville hired 59 fire service employees, incuding command staff, EMS staff, captains, engineers and firefighter/paramedics while contracting out fire prevention services . It purchased five command vehi cles, two paramedic squad units and two Type -1 structural engines. The fire department also, very recently, purchased a brand new Type 3 brush engine. The new Type 3 brush engine is expected to go into service before the end of the 19 -20 fiscal year. It also successfully entered into a contract for dispatch services from CONFIRE. With its dispatch contract, Victorville Fire then began using Emergency Medical Dispatch (EMD) and Medical Pr iority Dispatching System (MPDS).
Through the use of EMD and MPDS, th e number of medical calls responded to by Victorville Fire have been reduced and the engine availabiltiy for fire supression incidents has increased. Altogether, EMD and MPDS utilization is allowing for a decrease in the use of apparatus by approximately 11%.
Public Safety Plan Page 19
TABLE: B1 STAFFING LEVELS
*Starting FY09 went to County Fire contract
Table B1 above shows the staffing trend since 2008 and reflects a downward trend of staffing levels.
Table B1 also shows that when compared to the period for which San Bernardino County Fire Department operated in Victorville, the Victorville Fire Department is operating 4 stations with less staff.
TABLE: B2 FIRE SERVICE COSTS
Table B2 illustrates the upward trend in total expenditures leading up to 2018. This figure specifically excludes analysis of 2019 due to start up costs required to transition the fire department. The 17/18 fiscal $-
$2,000,000
$4,000,000
$6,000,000
$8,000,000
$10,000,000
$12,000,000
$14,000,000
$16,000,000
2000
2001
2002
2003
2004
2005
2006
2007
2008
2009*
2010
2011
2012
2013
2014
2015
2016
2017
2018
Actuals
Actuals11.95 M
4.30M
14.265M
13.06M
-
10 20
30 40
50 60
70 80
Non-Sworn
Sworn
64 61
71 66
68 65
72 67
63 63
54 55
59 Public Safety Plan Page 20
year was the last full year Victorville fire s ervice was provided by San Bernardino County Fire Department and cost $ 14.26 million. The estimated cost for operations alone, of t he 19/20 San Bernardino County F ire Department contract was $14.34 million. For comparison purposes, the first full year of operation for Victorville Fire Department is $13.91 million and includes $909,000 in capital.
Although Victorville Fire Department is operating at a reduced cost when compare d to San Bernardino County Fire Department, the Victorville Fire Department, after its first full year of operation , has identified numerous deficiencies in its current level of service that may hinder its ability to properly and safely manage the complexity of incidents it may be required to respond to.
FIRE MANAGEMENT
The Victorville Fire Department desires to be an “All Risk” fire department and must be prepared to respond to not only fires and medical calls, but must also be trained and properly equipped to handle a variety of incidents including; hazardous material incidents, swift water, urban search and rescue (USAR), trench rescue, vehicle extrication and aircraft incidents. Victorville is the second busiest fire department in San Bernardino County with approximately 22,000 emergency responses each year. The variety and complexity of the target hazards within the City require resources and training that most agencies won’t encounter. All emergency operations are managed utilizing the Incident Command System which is based on the National Incident Management System (NIMS).
The city is broken in to 7 fire management zones , illustrated in Table B3, below. Each zone has its own unique set of challenges in providing safe and efficient emergency response. Those challenges include a need for facility related improvements, apparatus upgrades, personnel additions and tooling/equipment necessary to perform the job.
Public Safety Plan Page 21
TABLE B3, FIRE MANAGEMENT ZONE MAP
Public Safety Plan Page 22
FIRE MANAGEMENT ZONE 311
Fire Station 311 is located in the Northeastern part of the city. This station is staffed each shift with (9) personnel consisting of a Battalion Chief, (2) Captains, (2) Engineers, and (4) Firefighter Paramedics.
Frontline staffed apparatus includes (1) Type 1 Structure Engine, (1) Ladder Truck, (1) Brush Engine and (1) Medic Squad.
Within this management zone, crews provide the following services: structural and wild land firefighting, USAR response, HazMat response and EMS. Personnel may be required to respond out of their primary zone to assist with any aircraft incident that may o ccur at Southern California Logistics Airport (SCLA).
Each emergency service delivery program has a level of risk for this zone as outlined below.
TABLE B4 - FMZ 311 RISK ASSESSMENT OUTLINE
TYPE OF INCIDENT FREQUENCY RISK
Structural High High
Wildland High High
USAR Low High
HazMat Low High
Aircraft Rescue Firefighting (ARFF) Low Low
EMS High Low
Some target hazards within this management zone are:
1. Cemex Cement Plant
2. Interstate 15 & Air Expressway
3. River bottom wild land response
4. Railroad
FIRE MANAGEMENT ZONE 312
Fire Station 312 is located in the Northwestern part of the city. This station is st affed each shift with (3) personnel consisting of a (1) Captain, (1) Engineer, and 1 Firefighter Paramedic. Frontline staffed apparatus includes (1) Type 1 Structure Engine. (1) Brush Engine is assigned to the station and cross staffed when needed by the engine crew.
Public Safety Plan Page 23
Within this management zone, crews provide the following services: structural and wild land firefighting, USAR response, HazMat response, ARFF and EMS. Each emergency service delivery program has a level of risk for this zone as outlined below.
TABLE B5- FMZ 312 RISK ASSESSMENT OUTLINE
TYPE OF INCIDENT FREQUENCY RISK
Structural Medium High
Wildland Medium Medium
USAR Low High
HazMat Low Medium
Aircraft Rescue Firefighting (ARFF) Low Low
EMS High Low
Some noticeable target hazards within this management zone are:
1. SCLA /Keurig Dr Pepper Plant
2. US Route 395 & Interstate 15
3. Federal Penitentiary
4. Multiple Apartment complexes
FIRE MANAGEMENT ZONE 313
Fire Station 313 is located in the Southwestern part of the city. This station is staffed each shift with (3) personnel consisting of a (1) Captain, (1) Engineer, and (1) Firefighter Paramedic. Frontline staffed apparatus includes (1) Type 1 Structure Engine (1) Medic Squad (Unstaffed Reserve).
Within this management zone, crews provide the following services: structural and wild land firefighting, USAR response, Haz Mat response, ARFF and EMS. Personnel may be required to respond out of their primary zone to assist with any aircraft incide nt that may occur at Southern California Logistics Airport (SCLA). Each emergency service delivery program has a level of risk for this zone as outlined below.
Public Safety Plan Page 24
TABLE B6 - FMZ 313 RISK ASSESSMENT OUTLINE
TYPE OF INCIDENT FREQUENCY RISK
Structural Medium High
Wildland Medium Medium/Low
USAR Low Low
HazMat Low Medium
Aircraft Rescue Firefighting (ARFF) Low Low
EMS High Low
Some noticeable target hazards within this management zone are:
1. Hotel/Restaurant Row
2. US Route 395 & Interstate15
3. Mall of Victor Valley
4. Multiple Strip Malls and Shopping Centers
FIRE MANAGEMENT ZONE 314
Fire Station 314 is located in the Southeastern part of the city. This station is staffed each shift with (3) personnel consisting of a (1) Captain, (1) Engineer, and 1 Firefighter Paramedic. Frontline staffed apparatus includes (1) Type 1 Structure Engine . The station also has (1) unstaffed reserve ladder truck.
Within this management zone, crews provide the following services: structural and wildland firefighting, USAR response, HazMat response , ARFF and EMS. Personnel may be required to respond out of th eir primary zone to assist with any aircraft incident that may occur at Southern California Logistics Airport (SCLA). Each emergency service delivery program has a level of risk for this zone as outlined below.
TABLE B7 - FMZ 314 RISK ASSESSMENT OUTLINE
TYPE OF INCIDENT FREQUENCY RISK
Structural Low High
Wildland Low High
USAR Low High
HazMat Low High
Aircraft Rescue Firefighting (ARFF) Low Low
EMS High Low
Public Safety Plan Page 25
Some noticeable target hazards within this management zone are:
1. Goodyear Tire & Rubber Co./Mars Pet Food Plant/ Church & Dwight Production Plant
2. Interstate15 / Railroad
3. Multiple Strip Malls and Shopping Centers
FIRE MANAGEMENT ZONE 315
Fire Stat ion 315 is located in the most s outhwestern part of the city. This station is currently unstaffed and within this management zone, crews from surrounding stations provide the following services: structural and wild land firefighting, USAR response, HazMat response, ARFF and EMS.
This fire management zone is primarily residential; however , upon opening this station, personnel may be required to respond out of their primary zone to assist with calls in FMZ 316 that can be better responded to than Station 313 along with any aircraft incident that may occur at Southern California Logistics Airport (SCLA). Each emergency service delivery program has a level of risk for this zone as outlined below.
TABLE B8 - FMZ 315 RISK ASSESSMENT OUTLINE
TYPE OF INCIDENT FREQUENCY RISK
Structural Medium High
Wildland Medium Medium/Low
USAR Low Low
HazMat Low Low
Aircraft Rescue Firefighting (ARFF) Low Low
EMS High Low
Some noticeable target hazards within this management zone are:
1. Hotel/Restaurant Row
2. US Route 395
3. Bear Valley Road
4. Multiple Strip Malls and Shopping Centers
Public Safety Plan Page 26
FIRE MANAGEMENT ZONE 319
Fire Stat ion 319 is located in the most n orthern part of the city at SCLA.
This station is owned by SCLAA and is currently staffed by a priva te contractor, Mission Aviation, providing ARFF services at SCLA . SCLA’s contracted service is for “on -airport” ARFF services. FS 312 is responsible for coverage in the areas located outside of the sterile area , considered “off- airport”.
TABLE B9 - FMZ 319 RISK ASSESSMENT OUTLINE
TYPE OF INCIDENT FREQUENCY RISK
Structural Medium High
Wildland Medium Medium/Low
USAR Low Low
HazMat Low Low
Aircraft Rescue Firefighting (ARFF) Low Low
EMS High Low
Some noticeable target hazards within this management zone are:
1. Airfield Tenants including Boeing & GE Aviation
2. Keurig Dr Pepper Plant
3. United Furniture Industries
4. Newell Rubbermaid
FIRE STATION FACILITY CONDITIONS
Fire station facilities need to meet the needs of the community; shall be ADA compliant and provide members of the Department with a safe, sanitary, and efficient working environment. As noted in transition reports that were prepared when Victorville react ivated its City run Fire Department, it was documented that fire station facilities were not properly maintained. It is for this reason that this report will identify what will feel like an inordinate amount of deficiencies and requiring attention in the departments early transition years.
FIRE STATION 311
Public Safety Plan Page 27
FS 311 is in need of significant repair and upgrades throughout the station including kitchen, dorms, restrooms, and office area and does not meet current ADA requirements. The following summarizes noted station requirement:
▪ There is no security gate or fencing for the parking area and hose tower, therefore theft and intrusion into the fire station property cannot be prevented. The area has a significant homeless population which are frequently found wa ndering the fire station parking lot, washing clothes in the station laundry, and wandering inside the fire station. ▪ The lack of security around the 4 -story hose tower allows access by civilians. This access creates a liability for the City if someone decided to go into the tower and get hurt or jump off it. ▪ Lockers for uniforms and personal items do not allow for adequate storage of bedding, clothes, or personal items. Uniforms used during the shift are often hung on walls or laid on floors exposing members to harmful contaminates.
▪ The apparatus bay lacks the capacity to house all apparatus assigned inside which leaves expensive apparatus parked outside leaving them exposed to the elements and vulnerable to theft and vandalism.
▪ There is a significant lack of storage for Personal Protective Equipment (PPE) and tools, hose, and power equipment available.
FIRE STATION 312
FS 312 is generally in good condition and in need of moderate repair and upgrades throughout the station including kitchen, dorms, restrooms, and office area does not meet current ADA requirements. The following summarizes noted station requirement:
▪ There is no security gate or fencing for the parking area, therefore theft and intrusion into the fire station property cannot be prevented.
▪ Lockers for uniforms and personal items do not allow for adequate storage of bedding, clothes, or personal items. Uniforms used during the shift are often hung on walls or laid on floors exposing members to harmful contaminates.
▪ There is a significant lack of storage for Personal Protective Equipment (PPE) and tools, hose, and power equipment available.
FIRE STATION 313
FS 313 is in need of significant repair and upgrades throughout the station including kitchen, dorms, restrooms, and office area and does not meet current ADA requirements. The following summarizes noted station requirement:
Public Safety Plan Page 28
▪ The kitchen and dining ar ea size is inadequate and the station does not have the capacity to properly staff and provide sleeping and sanitary needs for more than (3) firefighters. This station may be required to staff Medic Squad 313 with (2) additional firefighters for a total of (5). ▪ There is no security gate or fencing for the parking area, therefore theft and intrusion into the fire station property cannot be prevented. The area has a park behind the station in which enables the community to walk through the station parking lot and access the fire station. ▪ Lockers for uniforms and personal items do not allow for adequate storage of bedding, clothes, or personal items. Uniforms used during the shift are often hung on walls or laid on floors exposing members to harmful contaminates.
▪ The apparatus bay lacks the capacity to house reserve apparatus inside which leaves expensive apparatus parked outside leaving them exposed to the elements and vulnerable to theft and vandalism.
▪ There is a significant lack of storage for Personal Prote ctive Equipment (PPE) and tools, hose, and power equipment available.
▪ The station does not have a hose tower to hang hose to dry. This should be addressed as soon as possible to ensure that fire hose is properly cared for and stored.
FIRE STATION 314
FS 314 is in fair condition and in need of minor repairs and upgrades throughout the station including kitchen, dorms, restrooms, and office area and does not meet current ADA requirements. The following summarizes noted station requirement:
▪ There is a security gate, however, it is not electric which causes the fire engine to either back into quarters or manually open and close the gate after every response. ▪ There is a significant lack of storage for Personal Protec tive Equipment (PPE) and tools, hose, and power equipment available.
▪ The station does not have a hose tower to hang hose to dry. This should be addressed as soon as possible to ensure that fire hose is properly cared for and stored.
FIRE STATION 315
FS 3 15 is unstaffed and in good condition requiring only general upgrades or repairs. The following summarizes noted station requirement:
▪ There is a security gate , however, it is not electric which would cause the fire engine to either back into quarters or manually open and close the gate after every response.
Public Safety Plan Page 29
▪ There is a significant lack of storage for Personal Protective Equipment (PPE) and tools, hose, and power equipment available.
FIRE STATION 319
FS319 is located at SCLA and is good condition.
APPARATUS
Victorville owns its fire apparatus and chose to make upgrades to its apparatus fleet as a part of the transition from county fire service to city service. Most notably, Victorville purchased two new paramedic squad units, two medic engines and new command staff vehicles. Victorville also authorized the purchase of a Type 3 brush engine to replace one of the two Type 3 brush engines currently in service.
The new Type 3 brush engine is expected to be placed into service prior to June 30, 2020. Table B10 below summarizes apparatus by station assignment and its role, as a front line responder, a reserve unit or a unit that has been considered surplus and not needed. Each apparatus requires routi ne maintenance and upgrade and shal l be included in a repair and replacement program . Exhibit B3 provides a visual reference on the different types of apparatus and an explanation as to what purpose each apparatus serves.
TABLE B10 - FIRE APPARATUS BY STATION
Public Safety Plan Page 30
LOCATION UNIT NAME DESCRIPTION YEAR TYPE STATUS
STA 311 BE311 BRUSH ENGINE 1995 3 Front line
STA 311 MT311 TRUCK, 75' 2006 Ladder Front line
STA 311 ME311 PUMPER 2014 1 Front line
STA 311 E310 PUMPER 2002 1 Reserve
STA 311 E315 PUMPER 2002 1 Reserve
STA 311 MS311 PARAMEDIC SQUAD UNIT 2018 SQD Front line
STA 311 4315 FORD EXPLORER, 2018 2018 CMD Front line
STA 311 4311 FORD EXPLORER, 2018 2018 CMD Front line
STA 311 4301 FORD EXPLORER, 2018 2018 CMD Front line
STA 311 4310 FORD EXPLORER, 2018 2018 CMD Front line
STA 311 4300 FORD EXPLORER, 2018 2018 CMD Front line
STA 311 None ENGINE 1988 1 Surplus
STA 312 ME312 PUMPER 2019 1 Front line
STA 312 BE312 BRUSH ENGINE 1996 3 Front line
STA TBD ME312 PUMPER 2006 1 Reserve
STA 313 ME313 PUMPER 2019 1 Front line
STA 313 MS313 PARAMEDIC SQUAD UNIT 2018 SQD Reserve
STA TBD ME313 PUMPER 2006 1 Reserve
STA 314 ME314 PUMPER 2004 1 Front line
STA 314 T314 TRUCK, 100' 2001 Ladder Reserve
STA 314 None PUMPER 2001 1 Surplus
STA 315 None PUMPER 2001 1 Surplus
STA 315 None PUMPER 1990 1 Surplus
STA 315 None PUMPER 1994 1 Surplus
APPARATUS- NOTICED CONDITIONS
Brush Engine 311 (1995) is unreliable and does not meet the NFPA safety requirement and should be replaced before brush season in June 2020. On numerous incidents , the engine failed to start or had pump failure.
Medic Truck 311 is less than ideal from a design perspective when considering response to Victorville’s type of structure fires. Considering its increased mileage operating principally out of Victorville’s busiest station, the department should consider d eveloping a specification for a new truck in the next few mon ths with a projected purchase / delivery approximately 2 years later. MT 311 could serve as a reserve unit upon its replacement.
Medic Engine 311 (201 4) was purchased on a grant during the County contract. This engine has some damage causing it to track slightly sideways while driving and increasing tire wear. There are some signs that it was possibly drug sideways, possibly out of a ditch, causing possible frame damage.
It is likely that we will not receive the full life cycle from this engine and should establish a plan to move it into reserve in the next 5-8 years.
Public Safety Plan Page 31
Brush Engine 312 (1996 ) is unreliable and does not meet the NFPA safety requirement and should be replaced before brush season in June 2020. On numerous incidents the engine failed to start o r had pump failure.
Reserve Engine 312 (2006) was placed into service when the new KME was placed in service. This engine, with normal maintenance and repairs should be a reliable reserve.
Reserve Engine 313 (2006) was placed into reserve when the new KME was placed in service. This engine will be a reliable reserve needing general maintenance and repairs. Shortly after the transition, it had a new motor put in.
Medic Engine 314 (2004) has been reliable after receiving significant mechanical repairs after transition.
The department should follow the replacement plan for this engine.
FIRE RESPONSE
Victorville firefighters respond to a variety of different incidents including structural fire operations, wild land firefighting operations, Urban Search and Rescue (USAR) operations, hazardous materials (HazMat) incidents, Aircraft Rescue Fire Fighting (ARFF), fire prevention services and emergency medical services (EMS). All emergency operations are managed utilizing the Incident Command System which is based on the National Incident Managemen t System. Accordingly, firefighters require recurring training for such events along with incident appropriate equipment and tooling, apparatus and appropriate station location to maintain an appropriate response time to emergency incidents. Call volume for fire department services can influence the ability of a department to maintain an appropriate response time. Table B11 summarizes call volume in Victorville dating back to year 2000. Like its population, call volume has increased; however, given the pace at which call volume has grown, dramatically (216% increase) out paces population growth (92%).
TABLE B11 VICTORVILLE FIRE SERVICES CALL VOLUME
Public Safety Plan Page 32
YEAR POPULATION
*
ANNUAL
INCIDENTS
**
STAFFED
STATIONS
(Excl. 319)
FIRE
CALLS
MEDICAL
CALLS
OTHER
CALLS
2000 64,455 7,237 3 319 5,873 1,045
2011 117,219 15,424 4 635 12,671 2,118
2012 119,059 16,509 4 655 13,936 1,918
2013 120,368 17,522 4 637 14,827 2,058
2014 120,590 18,712 4 585 16,046 2,081
2015 121,168 20,776 4 715 18,000 2,061
2016 123,510 21,367 4 772 18,593 2,002
2017 123,565 22,846 4 867 20,109 1,870
2018 123,701 22,283 4 881 19,369 2,033
2019 126,543 22,973 4 967 19,715 2,291
* Editing population numbers will recalculate Calls per 1000 ** Annual incidents are based on Computer Aided Dispatch system incidents where a fire unit was assigned and dispatched. This eliminates duplicate incidents.
National Fire Protection Association (NFPA) 1710 “Standard for the Organization and Deployment of Fire Suppression Operations, Emergency Medical Operations, and Special Operations to the Public by Career Fire Departments” provides a standard for initial unit travel time within 240 seconds (4 minutes).
The current national standard for fire department coverage contained within NFPA 1710 also provides a standard for an initial response as well as Effective Response Force (ERF) measures. NFPA standards are intended to help fire departments provide safe and ef fective working conditions for both firefighters and members of the public. ERF categories include the following:
TABLE B12- ERF CATEGORIES
Low Hazard Medium Hazard High Hazard
One or two-family
dwellings, scattered
small (under 10,000
sq. ft.) businesses,
and industrial units.
Apartments, offices,
mercantile, and
industrial occupancies.
Schools, hospitals, extended
care facilities, high-rise, and
other high life hazard or
large fire potential
occupancies.
ERF - 15 ERF- 27 ERF - 42
Table B12 provides the minimum level of fire suppression personnel for structural fire operations to meet ERF based upon hazard levels. Mitigation factors such as fixed fire protection systems, sprinklers, and alarms may reduce risk. For illustration purposes, NFPA 1710 advises that to manage a 2,000 square foot 2-story house fire, the following tasks/resources should be provided:
Public Safety Plan Page 33
Incident Commander BC (1 FF) or (1) Engine (3) FF
Fire Attack (Initial) (1) Engine (3) FF
Fire Attack (Back Up) (1) Engine (3) FF
RIC (Rapid Intervention Crew) (1) Engine (3) FF (FF Rescue only) Search (1) Engine (3) FF
Vent/Roof (1) Truck (3) FF
This is the minimum and doesn’t address medical, power shut off, or other issues such as relief firefighters since a typical fire fighting crew can remain inside a structure for about 20 minutes before they are exhausted or running out of air.
TABLE B13- 2019 INCIDENT MAP
Public Safety Plan Page 34
Table B13 above highlights the 22,000 fire call responses throughout the Victorville community in 2019.
Exhibits B1 and B2 further illus trate where throughout the city, it can achieve a 240 -second response time, when considering factors such as the station location of the response appropriate apparatus.
Combined, coverage gaps e xist within the city boundaries and data shows that the greatest strain on existing fire response resources is being caused by FMZ 315. Station 315 is located in FMZ 315 and is not staffed or equipped for fire emergency response. FMZ 315 is being responded to principally by Station 313 and it is not uncommon for Station 312 to respond to FMZ 315. Call volume experienced in FMZ 315 for the period of March 30, 2019 to December 31, 2019, alone, yielded 612 incidents.
Public Safety Plan Page 35
Department data suggests that on an annuali zed basis, FMZ 315 could require anywhere from 800 to 1,100 calls, 90% of which are most likely to respond from Station 313 and 10% from Station 312. When these units get pulled out of their fire management zone, other Victorville stations or allied automa tic aide stations would be required or requested, respectively, to backfill the u noccupied fire management zone.
Since Victorville is experiencing more than 80% of its calls for medic related purposes, Victorville may want to consider activating Medic Squ ad 313, currently in reserve status, to improve its response to FMZ 315 until such a time that Station 315 can be open ed. Doing so would activate two medic response units from FMZ 313 until such a time that Station 315 can be activated.
FIRE DEPARTMENT RECOMMENDATION
Providing fire suppression and emergency service coverage to the City of Victorville in compliance with national standards and industry best practices will require an ongoing investment in personnel, operations, apparatus and facilities, both current ly and into the future. Recommended investment is necessary to maintain current resources and provide service expansion in areas currently not being served to standard coverage levels. This recommendation provides a phased approach over the course of the next 5 years, with a future outlook, toward years 6 through 20. Initial years are more definitive with increased ambiguity in years 6 -20 based on unknown city growth pattern s in the western edge. Notwithstanding these recommendation s, the City must consider preparing and adopting a Fire Service Master Plan to better support anything past year 3.
YEAR 1 – FY 20/21
PERSONNEL: Medic Squad 313, currently in reserve status, should be staffed at Station 313 with overtime (12 hr shifts 080 0-2000) for t his fiscal year. Once the department is fully staffed, it will put minimal strain on the workforce and provide the level of care that is consistent with our community needs. It will also place a quicker and more agile unit in FMZ 313 and offer flexibility in having it respond to FMZ 31 5 while being able to maintain medic presence in FMZ 313 with its fully staffed medic engine (313) .
Staffing MS 313 with overtime should be considered as a short term measure until a full staffed station can be opened in FMZ 315. The total cost for staffing the squad using overtime is $313,000 annually.
OPERATIONS: The department doesn’t currently have the tools or equipment to effectively, efficiently or safely respond to Urban Search and Rescue (USAR) and hazardous materials incidents. To establish a Type 2 USAR and a Level 2 HazMat response force , t he complete cost for a Type 2 USAR trailer is Public Safety Plan Page 36
$110,000 and the cost to bring the department within standards to respond to HazMat incidents is an additional $100,000. An additional $500,000 in tools and equipment is needed that would serve wildland firefighting, structural firefighting, aircraft firefighting and emergency medical response programs.
APPARATUS: Current projections identify that the department should staff a medic squad at FS 313.
Additionally, both Type 3 apparatus currently owned in the city are mid 90’s models that are easily 5 -10 years past their life expectancies. The first of the two brush engines requiring replacement is authorized for purchase and is expected to be put into service in fi scal year 19/20. The remaining Type 3 brush engine should be purchased at an estimated $343,000. Consider p urchasing a used replacement ladder truck and begin specifications for brand new purchase in later years, which is estimated at $500,000.
FACILITIES: FS 313 requires significant station modifications to support the existing staff, specifically bathroom and bedroom upgrades. This remodel should take into account the long term viability of FS 313 and the expanding community needs, as well as health a nd safety code mandates. Cost estimate is approximately $150,000.
Personnel $313,000
Facilities $150,000
Used Replacement LadderTruck $500,000
Department Equipment $710,000
Type 3 Brush Engine $343,000
Total $2,016,000
20/21 - YEAR 1 SUMMARY
YEAR 2 – FY 21/22 (1ST FULL YEAR OF OPERATIONS)
PERSONNEL: Open Station 315 and stand -up a three (3) person full -time crew. This crew will cross-staff a Type 3 apparatus or a Type 6 apparatus for a response to vegetation fires. Staffing would be a 24/7/365 model. This model will provide a level of equitable service coverage to the southwest corner of the city that is currently experienci ng residential and commercial growth. Operating costs would include nine additional full-time employees at the cost of $1,140,000 annually. The medic squad staffed with overtime would return to reserve status at Station 313 until call volume requires for a dedicated full -time reactivation.
Public Safety Plan Page 37
APPARATUS: Place a Type 1 engine with Advanced Life Support (ALS) capabilities in Station 315 .
Crews would also cross -staff the newly purchased and relocated Type 3 brush engine for an improved tactical response to vegetation fires. Capital purchase of a Type 1 engine is estimated at $700,000.
FACILITIES: Upgrade the departments training infrastructure and an additional $20,000 in facility improvements at Station 315 for 24-hour use will be required. Department infrastructure upgrades include the training tower at FS 311 . The FS 311 training tower has multiple issues and cannot be used for live fire training e xercises. This is a NFPA annual requirement that will help the department keep in compliance with industry best practices and allow firefighters to stay proficient in core firefighting responsibilities. Additionally, placing a Mobile Aircraft Firefighting Trainer (MAFT) at FS 319 is recommended. Placing this trainer at FS 319 will foster better training relationships with the SCLA Fire Department while filling a critical gap in our proficiency to mitigate these types of incidents. The estimate for both the training tower upgrade and MAFT is approximately $250,000.
Personnel - 9 (Station 315) $1,140,000
Facility/Maintenance $270,000
Capital (Type 1 Engine) $700,000 ME 315
Total $2,110,000
21/22 - YEAR 2 SUMMARY
YEAR 3 – FY 22/23
OPERATIONS: Purchase a Type 6 engine to be cross staffed at Station 313 offering flexibility to respond to smaller vegetation fires as opposed to responding with a much larger medic engine. A Type 6 could be used as a cross staffed unit to MS 313 in the event the department chooses to fully staff MS 313. Doing so could help reduce wear and tear and serve as a reserve squad in such an event.
Type 6 Engine $195,000
Total $195,000
22/23 - YEAR 3 SUMMARY
YEAR 4 & 5 – FY 23/24 AND 24/25
Public Safety Plan Page 38
PERSONNEL: Place a Type 1 apparatus with ALS capabilities and a three-person ( 3) person full -time crew at Station 319. Staffing a tiller or ladder type truck, at a to be determined station, on the west side of the city would provide timely response for non -sterile emergency services needs. Staffing would be a 24/7/365 model. Operating costs would include eighteen (18) additional personnel at the cost of $2,280,000. Mission Aviation, or simil ar contractor, would continue to provide ARFF services. The increased staffing would ensure that the airport remains at an optimum level of service according to the index at SCLA and Title 14 Code of Federal Regulations Part 139. Station 319 is currently s taffed with 7- 8 personnel from Mission Aviation and Mercy Air.
OPERATIONS: The Type 1 will be capable of delivering ALS and initial suppression services in the north section of the COV until commercial growth in the area requires an additional tiller or ladder type truck.
Additionally, this crew would also cross -staff a 1,500 - 2,000-gallon water tender. Water tenders are designed to provide support for vegetation and wildland fires as well as additional water capability based on limited water capability in the sterile area of SCLA. The Type 1 apparatus would also help in ensuring the first arriving ARFF vehicle is constantly supplied with water to ensure a coordinated rescue effort is possible.
APPARATUS: Purchase a Type 1 engine and a 1,500 – 2,000 gallon water tender at FS 319 and to place a tiller or ladder truck on the west side of Interstate 15 at FS 313, 315 or 319. These recommendations will significantly reduce response times within these fire management zones and provide muc h needed emergency services in a timely manner and fill critical response gaps. Expected maintenance cost for all apparatus would be approximately $15,000. Projected cost for all apparatus is $2 .2 Million dollars. ($1.2M tiller/ladder, $700K Type 1, $320K Water Tender)
FACILITIES: N/A
Personnel - 9 $1,140,000
Maintenance $15,000
Tiller/Ladder $1,200,000
Total $2,355,000
23/24 - YEAR 4 SUMMARY - TILLER/LADDER
WEST SIDE OF CITY - STATION 319
Public Safety Plan Page 39
Personnel - 9 $1,140,000
Maintenance $15,000
Type 1 & Water Tender $1,020,000
Total $2,175,000
24/25 - YEAR 5 SUMMARY - TYPE 1 &
WATER TENDER - STATION 319
YEAR 6 AND BEYOND – FY 25/26+
FY 25/26 and beyond – the area west of 395, referred to as FMZ 316, will require dedicated apparatus and staffing as development continues. Based on the Victorville 20-year General Plan, this area could have a population of 80,000 -100,000 residents as well as extensive commercial development. Given geographic distances, to the other Fire Management Zones, this would require coverage of a Type 1 engine, ladder truck, medic squad, and Battalion Chief for a total of 25 additional staff. Covera ge can be phased in based on pace of development. The City should plan for FMZ capital costs to be paid from development impact fees so as to soften the impact to the City’s general fund.
The phased approach presented is intended to reflect providing fir e and emergency services to residents within national and best practice standards.
The costs below, in Table B14, summarize the investment believed necessary to provide a more effective local fire service.
TABLE B14 – FIRE DEPARTMENT SUMMARY OF PROPOSED COSTS
20/21 21/22 22/23 23/24 24/25
Personnel $313,000 $1,140,000 $1,140,000 $1,140,000
Facility / Maintenance $150,000 $270,000 $15,000 $15,000 Capital $1,553,000 $700,000 $195,000 $1,200,000 $1,020,000 Total $2,016,000 $2,110,000 $195,000 $2,355,000 $2,175,000
Public Safety Plan Page 40
CODE COMPLIANCE & ENFORCEMENT DIVISION
Through support from residents and partnerships with key public agencies, the Code Compliance & Enforcement Division helps ensure residential and business communities are well -maintained and operate within the framework of the Victorville municipal code. The Division seeks to f irst gain voluntary compliance and then turns secondly, to enforcement efforts as a l ast resort. This report provides operational information, historical , current statistics and an outlook on further improving and growing these services.
CODE COMPLIANCE CASES
Cases are used to document a public complaint, a proactive compliance action i nitiated by an Officer or any other regulatory compliance action (business license, waste tire compliance, demolitions) that may result in the assessment of a penalty or abatement of a public nuisance.
TABLE C1 – HOW TO CREATE A CODE ENFORCEMENT COMPLAINT
Through the completion of inspections, Officers can generally attend to 17 cases per work day. Cases are identified by year and follow a sequential numbering system. Code Compliance case types include, but are not limited to:
• Residential property maintenance (trash,
junk cars and landscape issues)
• Commercial property maintenance (trash,
site maintenance, approved land -uses and
licensing, signs and secure vacant units)
• Illegal dumping
• Street vendors
• Reactive weed abatement
• Homeless encampments
• Yard sales and signs
• Abatement of severely dilapidated or
damaged structures
• Illegal marijuana cultivation
• Noise complaints
• Limited parking enforcement efforts to
support Police
Code Compliance
Case
Regulatory
Compliance
Action
Proactive
Compliance
Action
Public
Complaint
Public Safety Plan Page 41
• Fireworks
• Landlord/Tenant property complaints
• Waste tire disposal compliance
• Water conservation
• Unsecured and substandard structures
CASE STATISTICS:
Table C2 below summarizes the number of cases created each year over the past 20 years. A Code Compliance case is created by Code Compliance support staff after receiving a public complaint or action initiated by a Code Enforcement Officer for violation(s) that a re reported at a specific location. Cases generate inspections that are completed by Code Enforcement Officers.
TABLE C2 – CASE STATISTICS
YEAR
CODE
COMPLIANCE
CASES
BUSINESS
LICENSE /
RENTAL
BUSINESS
LICENSE
CASES
FATS,
OILS,
GREASES
(FOGS)
CASES
TIRE
(GRANT)
CASES
PARKING
CITATIONS
ISSUED
TOTAL CASES
HANDLED BY
CODE
COMPLIANCE
1999
2000
2001 1482 126 1608
2002 1588 128 1716
2003 1264 154 1418
2004 2400 207 2607
2005 4216 263 4479
2006 2816 271 215 3302
2007 3155 299 215 3669
2008 3004 313 162 313 3792
2009 2673 323 190 101 3287
2010 2593 330 174 29 3126
2011 2889 336 121 85 3431
2012 2734 342 114 56 3246
2013 2437 356 120 54 2967
2014 2852 373 118 88 3431
2015 3344 961 385 128 180 4998
2016 3166 2680 401 187 136 6570
2017 3493 2861 84 104 141 6599
2018 2474 2172 278 104 248 4998
2019 3127 2124 362 117 172 5902
A contributing factor to the downward trend in total cases handled by Code Compliance officers is due to the time and human resources required to attend to special priority activities such as illegal dumping clean-up, illegal marijuana residential grows and illegal firework enforcement. Enforcement against these types of illegal operations has become new priorities over the last 24-months.
Public Safety Plan
ACTIVE YEAR-TO-YEAR CASES
Cases that remain open at the end of each calendar year remain open and hold the same case year and case number until case closure. Some cases will remain active over an extended period of time until the violations are resolved and assessed fines/City expenses are paid.
Active cases from prior years are added to the list of newly created cases for that calendar year. Officers assess each case to determine if it is of high priority to ensure these cases are addressed first. Officers then manage cases by as signed area and follow a first in - first out approach as Officers aim to address older cases first.
CASE INSPECTIONS
Cases ge nerate inspections and are the o fficer’s primary work load indicator. Inspections follow an established compliance workflow pro cess that prompts the officer to complete a specific compliance step (example: issue a Notice of Violation, determine if a Notice of Pendency (lien) is necessary, issue a citation or take abatement action).
At least one inspection is conducted in each case to validate the reported violation(s). The completion of the initial inspection and related tasks will take the officer as much as 40 -minutes to complete. When violations are found, the case progresses with additional compliance inspectio ns designed to guide the officer in the next compliance step. Typically, at least 2 inspections are completed, but as many as 15 inspections may be needed to gain compliance and achieve case closure.
To dem onstrate that the incoming case load is beyond the work load capacity th us creating inspection delays, below is an analysis of the short fall relating to actual cases and time available by staff to attend to cases.
Public Safety Plan
TABLE C3 - CASELOAD CAPACITY ANALYSIS
Table C3 above, relies on calculations and assumptions summarized in Exhibit C, entitled Inspection Time Analysis. Table C3 shows an increase in actual caseload of 626 cases from 201 8 to 2019, representing a 12% increase. With a maximum caseload capacity of 4,074, not only is caseload increasing from year to year, an increasing amount of cases are being carried over from year to year.
TABLE: C4 - OPEN CODE CASE ACCUMULATION
2017 2018 2019 2020
2017 Rollover Cases 199 163 157
2018 Rollover Cases 1020 1007
2019 Rollover Cases 1385
New Year Cases 248 2474 3127 499
Current Year Total Cases 248 2673 4310 3048
Current Year Closed Cases 49 1454 1778 170
Roll to Next Year 199 1020 1385
Open case accumulation and carry over, means cases are taking longer to close. A major contributor to case close out taking longer is not just due to lack of personnel, but also due to its reaction to differing casework priorities, summarized below.
4074 4074
5276
5902
0 1000
2000
3000
4000
5000
6000
7000
7 CEOs/2018 7 CEOs/2019
Staffing Capacity vs. Actual Caseload
Maximum Caseload
Capability
Actual Incoming
Caseload
Public Safety Plan
CASE WORK PRIORITIES
During the last few years, the amount of time available to an Officer dedicated to clear code violations has decreased while the amount of incoming cases has continued to increase. Case delays occur due to unplanned tasks that may pull one or m ore Officers from scheduled inspections. Case delays also occur when on-going cases progress to abatement action and require the officer to dedicate additional time to work with the City Attorney’ Office to secure court orders, write abatement scope s of work and coordinate with contractors to execute the abatement.
The list below provides a list of high priority tasks and related time frames that consume an officer’s time resulting in a chain reaction effect delaying an officer’s scheduled case work/ inspections:
TABLE C5 – HIGH PRIORITY TASK/TIME
HIGH PRIORITY TASKS TIME TO COMPLETE EACH
TASK
Homeless Encampment Notices
(initial notice per encampment site)
Two officers required
1-2 hours
Homeless encampment clean up/
storage of property 1-3 hours
Homeless property release 1-1.5 hours
Street vendors 1-1.5 hours
Sewage calls 1-2 hours
Fat oils and grease (FOG) overflows 3-5 hours
Illegal marijuana cultivation 2-4 hours per grow
Structure fires/ Fire Department
emergency response support 1-2 hours
Police emergency response support 1-3 hours
Abatement Actions 2-4 hours
TIMELY SERVICE DELIVERY IMPACTS
Concerned residents reporting nuisance conditions that impact their community, property values and quality of life such as unmaintained landscape or trash/ debris are the most impacted and the most vocal about these unresolved conditions.
Example:
• Code Co mpliance receives and processes a complaint for unmaintained landscape or trash/ debris
Public Safety Plan
• If there are no high priority cases pending, the officer will inspect within 72 hours and issue a correction notice
• A follow up inspection is set for 30 days
• High priority cases or additional cases are sent to the officer requiring related case work • The pending 30 day inspection noted above is delayed due to ▪ High priority case response needs or
▪ Other cases pending with older follow up dates that are due to be completed • The uncorrected violation continues and is noticed by the concerned resident • The resident contacts Code Compliance and expresses dissatisfaction and frustration with the enforcement process and delays
REGULATORY COMPLIANCE ACTIONS
In addition to completing a number of inspections relating to property nuisances and land use violations, the Code Compliance Division completes regulatory inspections related to the following of city permits and licenses:
• FAT, OILS AND GREASE COMPLIANCE (FOG) - Inspections relating to the proper handling and disposal of FOG generated by restaurants. Through monitoring and strict regulation, these vital compliance efforts aim to prevent City sanitary system blockages that are one of the causes of sanitary system overflows. These efforts help ensure businesses remain in compliance with state and local laws and further protect public health.
• RENTAL PROPERTY LICENSING INSPECTIONS - Annual exterior inspections focused on ensuring rental properties are maintaine d. A passing inspection is required prior to licensing any new rental property or renewing an existing rental license. Approximately 44% of the City’s housing stocks are estimated as rentals (15,595 units) . The regulation of rental property helps all resi dents maintain healthy communities and positive property values.
• GENERAL CITY LICENSING - Through inspections, Officers assist businesses in completing the licensing process, address land use and zoning issues and enforce annual license renewal requirements.
• MOBILE HOME PARK MAINTENANCE AND COMPLIANCE - As required by the California Department of Housing and Community Development, the Building Division completes two required mobile home park and space inspections annually. Mobile Home parks space s range from 20 to 366 spaces and each space is evaluated for property maintenance. The Code Compliance Division provides enforcement measures on each park/space that continues to be in violation so that residents
Public Safety Plan
continue to live in a safe area. Of the 1 2 mobile home parks, the City inspects at minimum, two parks per year. Code Compliance will create a code compliance case at each Mobile Home Park space that remains in violation to help the space occupant come into compliance. • BUILDING PERMIT COMPLIANCE – The Code Compliance Division provides added follow up options for incomplete building permits. These actions help ensure structures are built safe and achieve final approval with proper documentation.
• PROPERTY TRESPASS AGREEMENTS – Due to increased imp acts related to homeless encampments, through the management of this online service, the Code Compliance Division helps owners of commercial and vacant property take control of their property and provide a faster law enforcement response.
ABATEMENT ACTIONS
Generally after a number of failed inspections, Officers may need to proceed with abatement actions that include warrant writing, abatement scopes of work for bidding contractors, demolition actions or receiverships. Abatement actions require a considerabl e amount of additional officer time to prepare the case for these actions and, as a result, create delays to other scheduled work.
STAFFING LEVELS
The table below summarizes the number of budgeted Code Enforcement Officers, Supervisors and Managers, and Other Enforcement Officers the Code Compliance Division has had over the past 20 years.
Budgeted positions do not equal the actual number of Officers working during these assessed periods.
Public Safety Plan
TABLE C6 – STAFFING LEVELS
YEAR CODE OFFICERS
SUPERVISORS /
MANAGERS OTHER OFFICERS TOTAL
1999 3 0 3 6
2000 3 0 3 6
2001 3 0 2 5
2002 3 0 2 5
2003 3 0 2 5
2004 4 1 2 7
2005 5 1 3 9
2006 6 1 0 7
2007 6 1 0 7
2008 6 1 0 7
2009 7 1 1 9
2010 7 1 2 10
2011 5 1 2 8
2012 5 1 1 7
2013 7 1 2 10
2014 7 1 2 10
2015 7 1 2 10
2016 8 2 0 10
2017 8 2 0 10
2018 8 1 0 9
2019 7 1 0 8
* Other Enforcement Officers refers to Code Enforcement Officers that were assigned to other divisions (i.e. Sanitation, Planning, Building, Business License) in the City to only enforce that division’s specific code.
CASE TYPE: Code cases are characte rized with two case types, reactive or proactive. A reactive case is generated by a complaint submitted by the public that prompts an Officer to verify the existence of the alleged violation(s). A proactive case is where an Officer sees a violation(s) tha t impacts the public’s health and safety and creates a case without the need for a public complaint.
TABLE C7 - CASE TYPES
YEAR CASES REACTIVE PROACTIVE
2016 3166 2753 413
2017 3493 3149 344
2018 2474 2122 352
Public Safety Plan
Since 2016, the code Enforcement posture has been increasingly reactive when you consider the decreasing trend of proactive responses and the increasing amount of time it takes to close out cas es as evidenced in Table C4 by the increasing number of carry over cases.
Table C8 below summarizes the number of reactive cases were created each year over the past 4 years, and how the complaint was received.
TABLE C8 - CASE REPORT METHOD BREAKDOWN
YEAR
REACTIVE
CASES
IN
PERSON PHONE EMAIL
2018 2122 77 202 80
2019 2780 321 1317 531
Table C9 below summarizes the number of Code Compliance cases, inspections completed, Notices of Pendency filed and citations issued.
TABLE C9 – ENFORCEMENT STAGES
YEAR
NEW
CASES
CASES
CARRIED
OVER FROM
PRIOR YEAR(S)
INSPECTIONS
COMPLETED
NOPs
FILED
CITATIONS
ISSUED
1999
2000
2001 1482 1
2002 1588 38
2003 1264 6
2004 2400 12
2005 4216 10
2006 2816 76
2007 3155 1745
2008 3004 777
2009 2673 1688
2010 2593 2109
2011 2889 3 1095
2012 2734 3 1704
2013 2437 225 2102
2014 2852 119 1005
2015 3344 485 1679
2016 3166 545 1372
2017 3493 842* 533 1608
2018 2474 199 6587 276 1174
2019 3127 1183 7042 352 1373
*October 2017 conversion from Tidemark to Energov. *Stats are Energov only.
Public Safety Plan
TABLE C10 – CURRENT STAFFING LEVELS:
POSITION
NUMBER OF
POSITIONS
TOTAL STAFF
COST (TOP STEP
WITH FRINGE) ASSIGNMENT
Code Enforcement
Official 1 $180,000
Division Head for Code Compliance and
Business License
Admin Analyst
1 $120,000
City Business License Division Lead and
Code Compliance Division Lead Admin
Support
Secretary 1
2 $162,000
Customer service, case creation and support
for the Code Compliance Division and all
related reactive, proactive and regulatory
compliance programs Customer service and
general in-City/out-of-City licensing and
rental licensing, processing and program
support
Code Enforcement
Officer II 6 $612,000
Assigned reactive and proactive public
nuisance and court abatement action cases
Code Enforcement
Officer I 1 $90,000
Assigned routing City regulatory compliance
tasks supporting other City service
departments
Total Staff Cost
Annually 11 $1,164,000
TABLE C11 – CURRENT STAFFING LEVELS (VEHICLES):
EQUIPMENT TYPE AGE VALUE MILEAGE
3-2001 Dodge Dakotas 19 years $3,600 Approx 100,000
4-2005 Chevy Colorado's 15 years $5,700 Approx 65,000
1-2004 GMC Sonoma 16 years $6,000 Approx 50,000
1-2009 Ford Crown Victoria Sedan 11 years $2,200 Approx 70,000
TABLE C12 – CURRENT STAFF EQUIPMENT LEVELS (FIELD GEAR)
EQUIPMENT TYPE VALUE USE NOTES
7 Motorola Police HT Radios $3,000 each radio Officer safety - communications 6 Ballistic Vest and Outer Shell $1,000 each officer Officer safety - protection Duty and Inspection Gear $1,000 each officer
Officer safety - expandable baton, OC spray,
badge, humidity, temperature and electric
testers, drill and other small tools etc.
5-Ipad Pro 12" Tablets and
Cellular Service
$1,200 each + $480
annual cell service Officer productivity - communications Uniform Budget $500 annually Officer safety - uniform and foot protection
Public Safety Plan
5 YEAR NEEDS ASSESSMENT – FUTURE NEEDS
The need to expand the Code Compliance Division is driven by a need for timely service, the need to maintain the health and safety of our residential communities and commercial businesses, an increase in addressing complex and time -consuming societal chall enges such as homelessness, illegal marijuana grows and the need for expanded, proactive identification of code issues.
The summary below provides details on the added tasks, valued public benefits, and required supervision that will be achieved if Code Compliance field and support staff is increased.
In addition to increasing and enhancing compliance efforts for programs already in place, additional Code Compliance field staff will jointly address the following tasks:
TABLE C13- EXPANDED CODE COMPLIANCE SERVICE
ADDITIONAL TASK PUBLIC BENEFIT
Street Parking
Compliance
This task is currently under the Police. The public will see a faster response time and improve community appeal and reduce blight. The Police can focus on addressing other priorities
City Park Patrol
With anticipated population growth, additional weekend Code Officers will patrol City parks, address park reservation disputes and enforce our more commonly violated park regulations such as smoking, consuming alcohol or camping in the park.
Vacant Property
Registration Compliance
Officers will monitor and ensure compliance to the City's anticipated vacant property registration. This program will aim to reduce the blight impacts of vacant properties, expedite the containment or abatement needs as a result of a structure fire and reduce emergency response expenses related to vacant properties incidents
Proactive Weed
Abatement Enforcement
As an alternative to responding to public reports of dry noxious weeds, a more traditional approach will be applied through proactive weed abatement enforcement
To meet the public expectation needs and City Council community enhancement priorities, additional staff is needed to produce noticeable community improvements and enhance overall City appeal .
Proactive enforcement is often requested by residents and is anticipated in residential and commercial zones. Proactive enforcement will focus on property maintenance, street parking, land use, weed abatement and rental property inspections. Increased f ield staff will require supervision to ensure productivity, minimize liability risks and maintain enforcement work quality.
Public Safety Plan
TABLE C14 - RECOMMENDED STAFFING LEVELS
POSITION
CURRENT
POSITIONS
NEEDED
POSITIONS ASSIGNMENT
ADDITIONAL
STAFF COST
(TOP STEP
WITH
FRINGE) EXPLANATION
Code
Enforcement
Official
1 0
Division Head for
Code Compliance
and Business
Licensing
N/A N/A
Admin
Analyst 1 0
City Business
Licensing Lead
and Lead Code
Compliance
Division Admin
Support
N/A N/A
Secretary 1 -
Range 21
(Change to
Technician -
Range 29)
2 1 @ $98,000
each
______
2 range
changes @
$17,000 each
Customer service,
case creation and
support for the
Code Compliance
Division and all
related reactive,
proactive and
regulatory
compliance
programs
___________
Customer service
and general in-
City/out-of-City
licensing and rental
licensing,
processing and
program support
$132,000
The process for code
compliance complaint
intake, case creation, case
fee assessment and admin
support along with
business licensing intake
processing and issuance is
a significantly more
technical than the
expected Secretary I
tasks.
Senior Code
Officer -
Range 38
0 2 @
$110,000
each
Assigned to lead
field operations
during all work
days, Senior will
ensure policy and
city personnel
compliance,
productivity
enforcement
efforts and
manage complex
abatement
$220,000
These two positions are
needed to better manage
increase field
enforcement staff,
minimizing risk exposure
and officer safety.
Seniors will be working
during all workdays -
Anticipated to be 7 days
per week and later
evenings and weekends
Public Safety Plan
TABLE C14 - RECOMMENDED STAFFING LEVELS (CONT.)
POSITION
CURRENT
POSITIONS
NEEDED
POSITIONS ASSIGNMENT
ADDITIONAL
STAFF COST
(TOP STEP
WITH
FRINGE) EXPLANATION
Code
Enforcement
Officer II
6 1@ $102,000
each
Assigned reactive
and proactive
public nuisance and
court abatement
action cases
$102,000
Increase needed based
on existing and
increasing case loads
related to population
growth and aging
housing stock. Added
assignments; street
parking, proactive
residential and
commercial
enforcement, weed
abatement, increase
joint Police and Fire
tasks, trending impacts
from homeless,
marijuana and added
business compliance
regulations processes.
Code
Enforcement
Officer I
1 2@ $90,000
each
Assigned routine
city regulatory
compliance tasks
supporting other
City service
departments
$180,000
Increase needed based
on existing and
increasing case loads
related to population
growth business
growth, rental property
inspection and
licensing, general
business licensing
compliance and added
city regulatory tasks.
Total
Additional
Staff Cost
Annually
6 $634,000
Fleet efficiency and maintenance / usage cost can be improved by using same or closely similar vehicles.
Desired vehicle age limit is set to 15 years. Stated vehicle needs below assume that only current vehicle stock assigned to this division is 15 years or newer. Vehicles will be shared among staff who will be working staggered work shifts.
Public Safety Plan
TABLE C15 - NEEDED CAPITAL (VEHICLES)
EQUIPMENT TYPE AGE VALUE TOTAL COST NOTES
4 - 2020 Chevy Colorado's
or similar
New $31,000 $124,000
4 - 2022 Chevy Colorado's
or similar
New $31,000 $124,000 Replacement of 2005 Colorado's
1-2025 Ford Explorer New $35,000 $35,000 Replacement of 2009 Crown Victoria
5 Year Total $283,000 Lease to own option available to
spread vehicle cost over 5 to 7
years
Equipment needs are primarily one -time expenses. Select equipment with expiration dates (vest) or laptops/ tablets may require upgrade due to technology improvements. Equipment standardization is established to ensure productivity and allow for inter-changeable tasks.
TABLE C16 - NEEDED STAFF EQUIPMENT (FIELD GEAR)
EQUIPMENT TYPE VALUE TOTAL COST
TOTAL DIVISION COST
FOR REPLACEMENT ITEMS
OVER 5 YEARS
3 - Motorola Police HT
Radios
$5,000 each
radio $15,000 (one time) N/A
Contract with Sheriff
Dispatch for HT use
Approx $35,000
annually $35,000 annually N/A
7 - Ballistic Vests and
Outer Shells
$1,000 each
Officer
$7,000 (every 5-7
years due to
expiration)
$7,000 (vests for current staff
will still be good)
7 - Ipad Pro 12" tablets
and cellular service
$1,200 each +
$480 annual cell
service each
$8,400 (7 new
Ipads) $16,800 (total
annual cell service
for 5 years)
$6,000 (replace 5 Ipads for
current staff) + $12,000 cell
service (total annual cell service
for 5 years) + $25,200 (total cost
for new staff) = $43,200
7 - Uniform Budget $500 Annually
$3,500 Officer
safety - uniform and
foot protection
$30,000 (12 field staff x $500 x
5 years)
Total $85,700
Public Safety Plan
TABLE C17 – EXISTING/PROPOSED ORGANIZATION CHART
CODE COMPLIANCE DIVISION/BUSINESS LICENSE DIVISION
Blue - Existing 9
Red - Proposed 6
Green - Title Change 2
Total Staffing 17
Code Enforcement Officer II
(Range 35)
Code Enforcement Officer II
(Range 35)
Code Enforcement Officer II
(Range 35)
Code Enforcement Officer I
(Range 30)
Code Enforcement Officer I
(Range 30)
Senior Code Enforcement Officer
(Range 38)
Code Enforcement Officer II
(Range 35)
Code Enforcement Officer II
(Range 35)
Code Enforcement Officer II
(Range 35)
Code Enforcement Officer II
(Range 35)
Code Enforcement Officer I
(Range 30)
Senior Code Enforcement Officer
(Range 38)
Technician
(Range 29)
Technician
(Range 29)
Technician
(Range 29)
Administrative Analyst
Licensing/Code Compliance
(Range 41)
Code Enforcement Official
Business License/Code Compliance
(Range 62)
Public Safety Plan
ANIMAL CARE & CONTROL
SECTION OVERVIEW
Through public participation, a partnership with a contract shelter provider and support from local businesses, the Animal Care and Control Division provides essential animal care services to residents, supports emergency responders to contain animals and ensures the public health through animal licensing and vaccination verification. This report provides operational information, h istorical and current statistics and an outlook on further improving and growing these services.
Notwithstanding the historical and current work performance and productivity, the report details the extensive tasks and responsibilities assigned to the Animal Care and Control Division, the limited staff levels and the need to expand public services related to the Animal Care and Control Division.
The historical section of this report takes a broad look at the statistical history through present -day Animal Care and Control Division operations. The report analyzes staffing levels, case statistics, operating conditions and case management processes.
The 5 -Year Assessment section of this report focuses on current and future Animal Care and Control Division operations. The report includes current and future staffing and operational needs, capital equipment needs, and projected fiscal impacts related to the expansion of the Animal Care and Control Division.
The information contained in this report origin ates from both prior and current City database and case management platforms.
OPERATIONAL INFORMATION
The information below is intended to provide a general understanding of the Animal Care and Control Division’s case management methods and related staff workloads.
ANIMAL CARE AND CONTROL CASES
Cases are used to document a public report related to the care of animals or to address urgent animal related service calls, such as animals on the street or containment to a ssist f ire and law enforcement.
Animal Control Officers also use cases to document proactive compliance actions initiated that may result in the assessment of a penalty or seizure of an animal, such as animal licensing. Through the completion
Public Safety Plan
of inspections, Of ficers can generally respond to as many as 25 cases per work day. Cases are identified by year and follow a sequential numbering system. Animal Care and Control case types include:
Rabies vaccination Animal licensing Animal abuse and neglect Pet grooming business regulations Stray animals Animal hoarding Breeder licensing Deceased animals Animal surrenders Animal noise Loose animals Animal containment
Private property animal quarantine Animal waste Animal hit by vehicle Animal bites and investigation Wild life containment Regulation of animal types
ACTIVE YEAR-TO-YEAR CASES
Animal Care and Control cases generally achieve prompt resolution resulting in the removal or containment of the animal, or licensing. Cases that require additional investigation through the Animal Care and Control Division or a local prosecutor remain open at the end of each calendar year and hold the same case year and case number until case closure. Some cases will remain active over an extended period of time until the violations are resolved and assessed fines/City expenses are paid.
Active cases from prior years are added to the list of newly created cases for that calendar year. Officers assess each case to determine if it is of high priority to e nsure these cases are addressed first. Officers manage cases by assigned area and follow a first in - first out approach as Officers aim to address older cases first.
CASE INSPECTIONS
Cases ge nerate inspections and are the o fficer’s primary work load indicator. Inspections follow an established compliance workflow process that prompts the officer to complete a specific task or compliance step (example: clear an animal from the street or contain an animal, issue a Notice of Violation, verify compliance or containment repair, document seizure or issue a citation).
At least one inspection is conducted in each case to validate the reported violation(s). On average, the completion of the initial inspection and related tasks will take the officer up to 35 minutes to complete.
When violations are found, the case progresses with additional compliance ins pections designed to guide the officer in the next compliance step. Typically, at least 1 inspection is completed, but as many as 7 inspections may be needed to be completed to gain compliance and achieve case closure.
Public Safety Plan
TABLE D1 - ANIMAL CONTROL CASE PROCESS
ADDITIONAL ANIMAL CARE AND CONTROL ASSIGNMENTS
In addition to completing animal related inspections, the Animal Care and Control Division also completes the following tasks:
• TRANSPORTATION OF ANIMALS TO CONTRACT SHELTER - Officers transport lost/found or surrendered animals at least once per day to our contract animal shelter located in the far north -east area of Apple Valley, where animals are sheltered and evaluated for adoption. The time it takes to transport an animal to Apple Valley reduces officer availability to attend to issues occurring in the Victorville community.
• MANAGEMENT OF TEMPORARY ANIMAL HOLDING FACILITY – The Palmdale Road facility is utilized to quarantine animals involved in a bite or other circumstanc es that require the animal to be under supervision. The facility is also used by law enforcement to temporarily hold an animal after an arrest. Animal Control Officers manage the complete care of the sheltered animals and maintain the facility on a daily basis.
• SPECIMEN TESTING – Where an animal biting occurs, p reparation of an animal for clinical rabies testing performed by the County Public Health Department in Ontario is required. An animal is typically prepared for these examinations by a veterinarian, however, on a rare occasion such an after -hours bite to a Law Enforcement Officer, staff prepares the animal for testing and transports the animal to the designated County facility.
Close Case
Take Photos
No Violation
1st Inspection
Close Case
Take Photos
No Violation
Notice of Violation
Close Case
Take Photos
No Violation
Compliance Inspection
Close Case
Take Photos
No Violation
Citation Inspection
Close Case
Take Photos
No Violation
Citation Inspection Compliance Inspection
Animal Control Case Process
Public Safety Plan
• COMMUNITY OUTREACH AND HUMANE EDUCATION – Animal Control Officers are often invited to provide humane education to students at local public schools. Officers provide information relating to proper animal care, the importance of animal vaccinations and the benefits of animal licensing.
• REQUIRED SHOT CLINICS – The Animal Care and Control Division holds at least two shot clinics per year as required by law. The Division takes the opportunity to also license and microchip animals and provides an opportuni ty for our contract shelter to showcase animals available for adoption.
• ON-CALL RESPONSE - Animal Control Officers are on -call throughout the calendar year and are available to respond to emergencies reported by all law enforcement agencies operating within the City. Officers respond to incidents on state highways located within the City and animal related emergencies that immediately jeopardize vehicular traffic.
• VETERINARY SERVICES FOR THE CARE OF SELECT ANIMALS – Animal Control Officers often initiate emergency veterinary care for injured, abandoned or neglected animals.
These emergency measures often require the officer to stay with the animal until the veterinarian can attend to the animal, resulting in a temporary field staff shortage. These measures require follow-up and sheltering coordination for the animal after treatment.
STAFFING LEVELS
The table below summarizes the number of budgeted Animal Control Officers, Animal Control Lead Officers and Supervisors and Managers. Budgeted positi ons do not equal the actual number of Officers working during these assessed periods. In many cases, actual number is less than budgeted due to a variety of factors.
Public Safety Plan
TABLE D2 - ANIMAL CONTROL STAFFING LEVELS
YEAR OFFICERS LEAD
OFFICERS SUP/MGR TOTAL
1999 3 0 0 3
2000 1 1 0 2
2001 2 1 0 3
2002 2 1 0 3
2003 2 1 0 3
2004 2 0 1 3
2005 3 1 1 5
2006 3 1 1 5
2007 3 1 1 5
2008 3 1 1 5
2009 4 1 0 5
2010 3 1 0 4
2011 4 0 0 4
2012 4 1 0 5
2013 3 1 0 4
2014 3 1 0 4
2015 3 1 0 4
2016 4 1 0 5
2017 4 1 0 5
2018 4 1 1 6
2019 4 1 1 6
The table below summarizes the number of cases that were created each year over the past 10-years. An Animal Care and Control case is created by either Animal Control support staff when the public submits a complaint or a license is expired, or proactively by an Animal Control Officer for a violation(s) that is occurring at a specific location and are inspected by Animal Control Officers.
TABLE D3 - CASE SUMMARY
YEAR CASES INSPECTIONS
COMPLETED
CITATIONS
ISSUED
ANIMAL CONTROL
LICENSES
2010 7128 N/A 91 2789
2011 7677 N/A 311 2262
2012 6933 N/A 193 1877
2013 6467 N/A 95 1767
2014 6413 N/A 193 2135
2015 6574 N/A 520 2148
2016 6696 N/A 580 2076
2017 5923 1133* 269 2168
2018 5457 6248 265 3348
2019 5430 6742 205 3231
Public Safety Plan
* Transitioning from the previous Tidemark database system to the new Energov database system.
The table below summarizes the number of after -hour phone calls that were received by Victorville’s dispatch service provider for the past 5 years.
TABLE D4 - ANIMAL CONTROL DISPATCH SERVICES
YEAR
TOTAL
CALLS
CALLS
OUT TO
OFFICERS
CALLS
TRANSFERRED
TO OFFICERS
MESSAGES
TAKEN FOR
THE
OFFICE
HANG
UP /
SALES
CALLS
NO
MESSAGE
TAKEN
CALLS
2015 10507 2927 114 3462 1337 2667
2016 9771 3306 146 3372 1599 1348
2017 9932 3151 214 3529 1558 1480
2018 8765 2727 144 3233 1432 1229
2019 7597 2453 112 3255 1248 529
A brief summary of each type of call:
➢ Incoming Calls are the total number of after -hour phone calls received by dispatch for Animal Control.
➢ Calls Out to Officers are the number of times that dispatch contacts an Officer regarding a call that they have received.
➢ Calls Transferred to Officers are the number of calls that dispatch connects directly to an Officer. ➢ Messages Taken for the Office are the number of calls that dispatch receives where the caller leaves a message for staff.
➢ Hang Up/Sales Calls are the number of calls that dispatch receives that are hang ups or telemarketer calls.
➢ No Message Taken Calls are the number of calls that dispatch receives where the caller indicates they will call back on the next business day or it may be a duplicate call.
After review of dispatch data, it appears that there is a large amount of calls that are received shortly after Animal Control closes each da y. Calls that go out to officers after hours require overtime pay. By extending Animal Control open hours, this could reduce the amount of overtime that is required and better service our residents.
Public Safety Plan
TABLE D5 - CURRENT STAFFING LEVELS
POSITION
CURRENT
POSITION
TOTAL STAFF
COST (TOP
STEP WITH
FRINGE) ASSIGNMENT
Animal Control
Manager 1 $143,000
Manage all Animal Control operations,
personnel and the divisional budget
Animal Control
Community
Outreach Officer 1 $102,000
Position needed to improve the relationship
between the residents and Animal Care and
Control, provide education to community
groups and schools and assist Animal
Control Officers with the workload
Secretary I 1 $81,000
Assigned case intake, officer dispatching
and animal licensing.
Animal Control
Lead Officer 1 $89,000
Senior officer and backup to supervisor.
Coordinates animal care operations and
lead officer for animal bite cases. Part of
on call staff list. Responds to escalated
public complaints.
Animal Control
Officer 3 $78,000 each
Respond to loose, dangerous or abused
animal requests from the public and public
agencies. Regularly supports Police and
Fire departments to restrain animals.
Enforces animal licensing laws. Supports
off-site contract animal shelter operations.
Part of on call staff list.
Total Staff Cost
Annually 7 $649,000
TABLE D6 - CURRENT CAPITAL LEVELS (VEHICLES)
EQUIPMENT TYPE AGE VALUE MILEAGE
1 - 2006 GMC Sierra 3500 14 years $3,500 232,400
1 - 2003 Chevy 2500 17 years $3,500 186,600
1 - 2015 Ford F250 5 years $15,000 60,420
1 - 2017 Ford F250 3 years $20,000 23,800
1 - 2016 Ford F150 4 years $15,000
Vehicle funded by Sanitation and currently has
Code Enforcement decals. Vehicle due back to
Sanitation
Public Safety Plan
TABLE D7 - CURRENT EQUIPMENT LEVELS (FIELD GEAR)
EQUIPMENT TYPE VALUE USE NOTES
0 - Motorola Police HT Radios
$3,000 each
Radio Officer safety - communications
5 - Motorola two way 800mhz
Radios
$1,500 each
Radio Officer safety - communications
5 - Ballistic Vests and Outer
Shells
$1,000 each
Officer
Officer safety - protection. Requires
replacement every 6 years
Duty and Inspection Gear
$700 each
Officer
Officer safety - expandable baton, OC
spray, badge, gloves, animal stick, storge
boxes and other small tools, etc.
5 - Ipads 9" tablets and cellular
service
$800 each +
$480 annual cell
service Officer productivity - communication
Uniform Budget $500 annually Officer safety - uniform and foot protection
The need to expand the Animal Care and Control Division is driven by an increase in human and animal population, increase in region vehicular traffic, the increase in stray and abandoned animals, the increase of emergency request from emergency responders related all animal matters, the need for improved spay and neuter education and the need to increase public animal licensing compliance. Additionally, time consuming societal challenges such as homelessness and increasing animal neglect issues continue to strain the City.
Expanded Animal Care and Control services will yield an increase in animal licensing, increased public educational opportunities, increased response times for common animal related public nuisances and improved animal health and services.
The City’s five year goal is to significantly improve Animal Care and Control field operations, animal licensing and fiscal performance. To reach these goals, an Animal Control Manager and additional Supervisors and Officers and are needed to produce noticeable animal care community improvements and adhere to reasonable animal euthanization rates. Added Officers will require added supervision to ensure productivity, minimize liability risks and maintain enforcement work quality.
Public Safety Plan
TABLE D8 - RECOMMENDED STAFFING LEVELS
POSITION
CURRENT
POSITIONS
NEEDED
POSITIONS ASSIGNMENT
ADDITIONAL
STAFF COST
(TOP STEP WITH
FRINGE) EXPLANATION
Animal Control
Manager (Range
49)
1 0
Manage all Animal Control
operations, personnel and the
division budget
N/A N/A
Animal Control
Community
Outreach Officer
(Range 35)
1 0
Meet with citizens and
community groups to resolve
customer service related
problems / complaints and
assist Lead Officer and
Manager with neighbor dispute
mitigation and resolution
N/A N/A
Secretary 1
(Range 21) 1 1 @ $81,000
each
Assist case intake, officer
dispatch and animal licensing
operations
$81,000
Animal Control complaint
intake, dispatching, case
creation, case fee
assessment and admin
support. Two are needed to
keep up with the current
workload
Animal Control
Lead Officer
(Range 28)
1 @ $89,000
each
Senior Officer and backup to
Manager. Coordinates animal
care operations and Lead
Officer for animal bite cases.
Part of on call staff list.
Reponsible for escalated
public complaints
$89,000
Added Officer needed to
lead Animal Control
Officers during operations 7
days per week and minimize
overtime. Lead Officer will
ensure all Officers are
proactively addressing City
animal licensing tasks
Animal Control
Officer (Range
24)
3 2 @ $78,000
each
Responds to loose, dangerous
or abused animal request from
the public and public agencies.
Regularly supports Police and
Fire Department to restrain
animals. Enforces animal
licensing laws. Supports off-
site contract animal shelter
operations. Part of on-call
staff list
$156,000
Added positions needed to
address high volume of calls
and provide more timely
responses. Added staff will
provide relief to already
strained staff workloads.
Total Staff Cost
Annually 4 $326,000
Fleet efficiency and maintenance / usage cost can be improved by using same or closely similar vehicles.
Desired vehicle age limit is set to 15 years. Stated vehicle needs below assume that only current vehicle stock assigned to this division is 15 years or newer. Vehicles will be shared among staff who will be working staggered work shifts.
Public Safety Plan
TABLE D9 - RECOMMENDED CAPITAL NEEDS
EQUIPMENT TYPE AGE VALUE TOTAL COST
3 - 2020 Ford F250 or
similar and Box New
$35,000 +
$18,000 box
$159,000 (Replacement of 2003 Chevy 2500.
Adding two more vehicles for added staff)
1 - 2022 Ford F250 or
similar New
$35,000 +
$18,000 box
$53,000 (Replacement of 2006 GMC Sierra
3500)
5 Year Total
$212,000 (Lease to own option available to
spread vehicle cost over 5 to 7 years. Does not
apply to box expenses.)
Equipment needs are primarily one -time expenses. Select equipment with expatriation dates (vest) or laptops/tablets may require upgrade due to technology improvements. Equipment standardization is established to ensure productivity and allow for inter-changeable tasks.
TABLE D10 - RECOMMENDED EQUIPMENT (FIELD GEAR)
EQUIPMENT TYPE VALUE TOTAL COST
TOTAL DIVISION COST FOR
REPLACEMENT ITEMS OVER
5 YEARS
6 - Motorola Police HT
Radios
$3,000 each
Radio $18,000 (one time) N/A
Contract with Sheriff
Dispatch for HT use
Approx $10,000
annually $10,000 annually $50,000 ($10,000 x 5 years)
5 - Ballistic Vests and
Outer Shells
$1,000 each
Officer
$5,000 (every 5-7 years
due to expiration)
$5,000 (vests for current staff will
still be good)
5 - Duty and Animal
Control Gear
$800 each
Officer $4,000 (one time)
$4,000 (equipment for current staff
replaced as needed)
5 - Ipad tablets and
cellular service
$800 each +
$480 annual cell
service
$4,000 Ipads (every 5
years) + $2,400 annually
for cell service
$4,800 (replace Ipads for current
staff) + $4,000 +$26,400 cell
service = $35,200
Uniform Budget $500 annually
$5,500 Officer safety -
uniform and foot
protection
$27,500 (11 field staff x $500 x 5
years)
Total $121,700
Public Safety Plan
TABLE D11 - EXISTING/PROPOSED ORGANIZATION CHART- ANIMAL CONTROL DIVISION
Blue - Existing 7
Red - Proposed 6
Total Staffing 13
Animal Control Officer
(Range 24)
Animal Control Officer
(Range 24)
Animal Control Officer
(Range 24)
Animal Control Officer
(Range 24)
Animal Control Lead Officer
(Range 28)
Animal Control Officer
(Range 24)
Animal Control Officer
(Range 24)
Animal Control Officer
(Range 24)
Animal Control Lead Officer
(Range 28)
Animal Control Community
Outreach Officer
(Range 35)
Secretary I
(Range 21)
Secretary I
(Range 21)
Animal Control Manager
(Range 49)
Public Safety Plan
FINANCIAL
Victorville currently operates under the amended 19 -20 fiscal budget which for all City operations, comprises an expenditure plan of approximately $254.2 million. The tot al spending plan authorizes 424 full-time employees. The City’s General Fund, which s hall be the focus of resources available to support public safety operations, comprises $66.9 million in revenue and $64.92 million in expenditures, with a proposed revenue surplus of $1.98 million. The total unencumbered general fund balance as of June 3 0, 2019 amounted to $12.8 million or approximately 19.7% of the 19/20 operating expenses. The 19/20 fiscal budget reported for the first time that the City had achieved and exceeded its general fund reserve target of 15%. It was further reported by staff that this reserve fund should be intended to serve both as a rainy day fund and as an operating/capital reserve for the City. Table E1 illustrates the trending of t he City’s general fund reserve.
Table E1 - General Fund Reserve Balances
Projections of general fund cash flow are illustrated in Table E2, below. Those projections do not include any increase in staffing levels for public safety and represent staff’s best estimate based on known cost of service upon adoption of the amended 19/ 20 fiscal budget . Table E2 projects that into the 21/22 fiscal year, revenues and expenditures begin to intersect, signifying expenditure growth out pacing revenue growth. These projections further show that for fiscal year 21/22 going forward, the gener al fund will deficit spend, unless supplemental revenue can be identified, until it runs out of general fund cash reserve in 26/27 fiscal year. Including the 19/20 fiscal year, revenues increase by $3.19 million or 4.77% through the 23/24 fiscal year. Including the 19/20 fiscal year, expenses increase by $ 8.92 million or 13.74% 2,229,649
781,523
5,047,053
3,238,364
6,178,917
12,812,405
$-
$2,000,000
$4,000,000
$6,000,000
$8,000,000
$10,000,000
$12,000,000
$14,000,000
2010 2011 2012 2013 2014 2015 2016 2017 2018 2019
Public Safety Plan
through the 23/24 fiscal year, illustrating expenditure growth at a higher growth rate than revenue growth rate.
TABLE E2 - PROJECTED CASH FLOWS (19/20 MIDYEAR BUDGET)
Fiscal Year 2019/20 2020/21 2021/22 2022/23 2023/24 2024/25 2025/26 2026/27 Revenues
Taxes 46,232,517 46,694,842 47,161,791 47,633,408 48,109,743 48,590,840 49,076,748 49,567,516 Licenses & Permits 1,978,250 1,998,033 2,018,013 2,038,193 2,058,575 2,079,161 2,099,952 2,120,952 Fines and Forfeitures 162,300 163,923 165,562 167,218 168,890 170,579 172,285 174,008 Intergovernmental 77,500 78,275 79,058 79,848 80,647 81,453 82,268 83,090 Charges for Services 3,142,468 3,205,317 3,269,424 3,334,812 3,401,508 3,469,539 3,538,929 3,609,708 Investment Income 867,538 876,214 884,976 893,825 902,764 911,791 920,909 930,118 Pass Through 5,609,000 5,665,090 5,721,741 5,778,958 5,836,748 5,895,115 5,954,067 6,013,607 Transfers In 52,000 52,520 53,045 53,576 54,111 54,653 55,199 55,751 Cost Allocations Received 8,196,734 8,360,669 8,527,882 8,698,440 8,872,408 9,049,857 9,230,854 9,415,471 Misc. Revenue 579,212 585,004 590,854 596,763 602,730 608,758 614,845 620,994 Total Revenues 66,897,519 67,679,886 68,472,345 69,275,042 70,088,125 70,911,745 71,746,056 72,591,215 Expenditures
Personnel 23,119,413 23,812,995 24,527,385 25,263,207 26,021,103 26,801,736 27,605,788 28,433,962 Sheriff Contract 27,733,208 29,075,443 30,529,215 32,055,676 33,658,460 34,668,213 35,708,260 36,779,508 Operations and Maintenance 12,167,788 12,471,983 12,783,782 13,103,377 13,430,961 13,766,735 14,110,904 14,463,676 Debt Service 230,710 230,710 230,710 230,710 230,710 230,710 230,710 230,710 Total Operating
Expenditures 63,251,119 65,591,131 68,071,093 70,652,970 73,341,234 75,467,395 77,655,662 79,907,856 Capital 1,676,648 502,000 502,000 502,000 502,000 502,000 502,001 502,002 Total Expenditures 64,924,920 66,093,131 68,573,093 71,154,970 73,843,234 75,969,395 78,157,663 80,409,858 Surplus/(Deficit) 1,972,599 1,586,755 (100,748) (1,879,928) (3,755,109) (5,057,650) (6,411,606) (7,818,643) Cash VMUS Loan Payment 1,000,000 1,000,000 1,000,000 1,000,000 1,000,000 700,000 General Fund Reserves 15,785,004 18,371,760 19,271,012 18,391,084 15,635,975 11,278,325 4,866,718 (2,951,925)
The projections above do not take into account the current state of emergency at the national, state and local levels. Orders that have been issued encouraging residents to stay at home to help reduce the pandemic spread of the COVID -19 virus is affecting revenue generation that very likely will require the City to use its general fund reserves if it intends to maintain service levels. Until the current global pandemic, the City’s general fund had been considered in a stable position however , it is safe t o assume that the projected deficit spending will accelerate. Based on current projections provided to the City by its sales tax consultant, HDL Companies, Table E3 has been prepared to highlight the estimated effects of the global pandemic.
Public Safety Plan
TABLE E3 – MIDYEAR GENERAL FUND COVID PROJECTED CASH FLOWS Fiscal Year 2019/20 2020/21 2021/22 2022/23 2023/24 2024/25 2025/26 2026/27 Revenues
Taxes 43,442,517 42,526,942 43,136,074 45,972,517 46,432,242 46,896,565 47,365,530 47,839,186 Licenses & Permits 1,978,250 1,998,033 2,018,013 2,038,193 2,058,575 2,079,161 2,099,952 2,120,952 Fines and Forfeitures 162,300 163,923 165,562 167,218 168,890 170,579 172,285 174,008 Intergovernmental 77,500 78,275 79,058 79,848 80,647 81,453 82,268 83,090 Charges for Services 3,142,468 3,205,317 3,269,424 3,334,812 3,401,508 3,469,539 3,538,929 3,609,708 Investment Income 867,538 876,214 884,976 893,825 902,764 911,791 920,909 930,118 Pass Through 5,609,000 5,665,090 5,721,741 5,778,958 5,836,748 5,895,115 5,954,067 6,013,607 Transfers In 52,000 52,520 53,045 53,576 54,111 54,653 55,199 55,751 Cost Allocations Received 8,196,734 8,360,669 8,527,882 8,698,440 8,872,408 9,049,857 9,230,854 9,415,471 Misc. Revenue 579,212 585,004 590,854 596,763 602,730 608,758 614,845 620,994 Total Revenues 64,107,519 63,511,986 64,446,629 67,614,150 68,410,624 69,217,470 70,034,838 70,862,884 Expenditures
Personnel 23,119,413 23,812,995 24,527,385 25,263,207 26,021,103 26,801,736 27,605,788 28,433,962 Sheriff Contract 27,733,208 29,100,523 30,555,549 32,083,327 33,687,493 34,698,118 35,739,061 36,811,233 Operations and Maintenance 12,151,096 12,438,386 12,749,346 13,068,080 13,394,782 13,729,651 14,072,892 14,424,715 Debt Service 230,710 230,710 230,710 230,710 230,710 230,710 230,710 230,710 Total Operating
Expenditures 63,234,427 65,582,615 68,062,990 70,645,323 73,334,088 75,460,215 77,648,452 79,900,620 Capital 1,676,648 502,000 502,000 502,000 502,000 502,000 502,001 502,002 Total Expenditures 64,924,920 66,084,615 68,564,990 71,147,323 73,836,088 75,962,215 78,150,453 80,402,622 Surplus/(Deficit) (817,401) (2,572,628) (4,118,362) (3,533,173) (5,425,463) (6,744,745) (8,115,615) (9,539,737) Cash VMUS Loan Payment 1,000,000 1,000,000 1,000,000 1,000,000 1,000,000 700,000 General Fund Reserves 12,995,004 11,422,376 8,304,014 5,770,841 1,345,378 (4,699,368) (12,814,982) (22,354,720)
Table E3 above considers revenues versus expenditures approved as a part of the City’s mid -year budget and it also includes downward adjustments in sales tax revenue for the current 19/20 fiscal year to suggest potential effects of the COVID -19 pandemic. Compared to Table E2, the COVID projections suggest a reduction in tax revenue in the current (19/20) fisca l year of $2. 79 million, an approximate 4.2% reduction in total general fund revenues. Table E3 further projects a revenue decline in the 20/21 fiscal year of approximately $4.2 million before general fund revenue begins to increase in the 21/22 fiscal year.
The tax revenue projections assume a recovery to 18/19 sales tax levels in the 22/23 fiscal year. Without an alteration to general fund expenditure levels, for illustration purposes, the COVID related projections identify a deficit spending of $817,401 in the current (19/20) fiscal year as opposed to pre -COVID projections not suggesting a deficit spending until the 22/23 fiscal year. The COVID related projections further identify a need to begin relying on general fund reserves to balance general fund expenditures in the 20/21 fiscal year as opposed to the 22/23 fiscal year. The COVID related projections suggest that without an increase i n revenue a reduction in service levels (expenditures) or a combination of both, the general fund will go negative in the 24/25 fiscal year.
Anticipating a near term deficit spending in the general fund as provided for in Table E3 above, the City should consider funding options if it is desirous of enhancing public services without reducing the service level of other programs currently being funded by the general fund.
Public Safety Plan
FUNDING OPTIONS
The general fund revenues largely consist of Sales and Us e Tax, Propert y Tax, Occupancy T ax and Franchise Fees. Because Franchise Fees are established and are based upon negotiated agreements with utility providers, they are not going to be focused upon for this analysis.
SALES AND USE TAX: In California, sales tax is applied to all retail sales of goods and m erchandise that are not otherwise exempt pursuant to State law. In Victorville, sales tax is applied to taxable sales at a rate of 7.75%. Use Tax is similarly applied for sale of goods from retailers outside of the State of California but consumed inside the State of California. Table E4 illustrates where sales tax in Victorville goes:
TABLE E4 - SALES TAX BREAKDOWN IN VICTORVILLE
California General Fund 3.6875%
California General Fund .25%
California Public Safety .5%
California Local Revenue 1.0625%
California Health & Social Services .50%
County Transportation .25%
Victorville General Fund 1.0%
Measure I .50%
Total 7.75%
Based on Victorville’s total audited financials, the 1.0% share of sales tax generated to its general fund amounted to $22.96 million which means gross taxable sales in the Victorville market amounted to $2.296 billion. The following chart illustrates the trend in sales tax revenue since the 07/08 fiscal year.
Public Safety Plan
TABLE E5 - GENERAL FUND SALES TAX REVENUE
State law provides residents of a community the ability to a uthorize an increase in the sales t ax levied, increasing the level of general fund revenues available to fund either a specific or general purpose.
GENERAL TRANSACTIONS AND USE TAX: Revenue & Taxation Code 7285.9 authorizes a City to levy a Transaction & Use Tax, for general purposes at a rate of .125% or increments of .125 % if an ordinance proposing the tax is approved by a 2/3 vote of its legislati ve body and the tax is approved by a majority (50%+1) of the qualified voters of the city voting in an election on the issue. California Revenue and Taxation Code Section 7251.1 provides for a Transactions and Use Tax to be levied up to an amount that doesn’t exceed 2%. In this case, Victorville residents could be offered the opportunity to consider a measure that increases the local sales tax rate from 7.75% to 9.75%.
SPECIAL TRANSACTIONS AND USE TAX: As an alternative to the General Transaction and Use Tax, Section 7285.91 provides the governing body of any city, the authority to levy a transaction, charged and collected in the same manner as a sales tax, for specific purposes, at a rate of .125 % or in increments of .125% if an ordinance proposing the tax is approved by a 2/3 vote of the members of the governing body and is subsequently approved by a 2/3 vote of the qualified voters of the city voting in the election on the issue. This type of tax also requires an expenditure plan. California Revenue and Taxation Code Section 19,840,200
15,967,225 15,171,815
19,447,976
20,974,688
22,957,781
21,902,930
-
5,000,000
10,000,000
15,000,000
20,000,000
25,000,000
2008
2009
2010
2011
2012
2013
2014
2015
2016
2017
2018
2019
2020
Public Safety Plan
7251.1 provides for a Transactions and Use Tax to be levied up to an amount that doesn’t exceed 2%. In this case, Victorville residents could be offered to the opportunity to consider a measure that increases the local sales tax rate from 7.75% to 9.75%.
Victorville last proposed a Special Transactions and Use Tax, referred to as Measure K in November of 2017. That Measure proposed a $0.50 sales tax and was specifically intended to be spent on public safety. The Measure gained 62% voter approval but did not meet the 66.67% or 2/3 majority required for a special tax to pass. A special tax may be considered at any regularly established election. A general tax must be considered at a general election at which membe rs of the City Council are elected (November 2020 or November 2022).
TRANSIENT OCCUPANCY TAX: Governed by Municipal Code Section 3.12.030, Victorville charges hotel and motel occupants within the City, a tax of 7% of the cost to rent a hotel/motel unit. The tax is charged to the hotel occupant, collected by the hotel/motel operator and remitted to the City on a quarterly basis.
Victorville last attempted to increase its Transient Occupancy Tax (TOT) by ballot measure in November of 2008. Ballot Measure C was considered at the November election and had proposed to raise the TOT from 7% to 10% and garnered 38.6% in favor and 61.4 opposed. The measure failed due to it not receiving a majority (50% ≥) vote.
PARCEL TAX: A parcel tax is a form of special tax levied against a piece of real property to benefit a specific municipal purpose. A parcel tax levy can be established as a flat or variable rate and gets levied on a property tax bill, collected by the County Tax collector and paid to the taxing entity at the same time $-
$200
$400
$600
$800
$1,000
$1,200
$1,400
$1,600
1999
2000
2001
2002
2003
2004
2005
2006
2007
2008
2009
2010
2011
2012
2013
2014
2015
2016
2017
2018
2019
2020
Thousands
Fiscal Year
TOT Received
564,548
957,328 964,075
841,113
1,487,091
Public Safety Plan
property tax disbursements are made by the County. The City last considered a parcel tax in 2017 as a function of its deliberation over whether or not it should ann ex into San Bernardino County Fire Protection District #5. The parcel tax proposed at the time amounted to $153 per parcel and was projected to raise approximately $5.8 million annually, plus an inflationary factor . Victorville chose in January 2018 to pur sue operational cost savings by forming its own city run fire department as opposed to pursuing a special parcel tax.
CITY MANAGER’S RECOMMENDATION
Among the funding options discussed above, staff considered the department recommendations and modeled those recommendations against costs associated with the most demonstrated need for service enhancement, balancing the need to meet its general fund reserve target of 15% and building a general fund reserve sufficient enough to cash flow deficit spending . Staff also considered a model that provides the City Council with discretion to use some of its projected surplus reserve funds to invest in other desired community impro vements. This model recommends a 1% General Transaction and Use Tax (TUT) which best offers the City Council flexibility in developing and funding policy decisions such as enhanced public safety, public library improvements, public park improvements and improved fiscal target reserves. A General TUT is projected to raise approximately $15.95 million in the 21/22 fiscal year, normalizing in the 22/23 fiscal year to pre -pandemic levels and increasing annually at a rate of 1% annually thereafter. Among the service level recommendations provided earlier in this report by staff, the only service enhancements that need to be placed on hold are the fire service enhancements recommended in years 4 and 5. Notwithstanding the adjustments to the fire service recommendations, the model does include debt service to help finance investments in apparatus.
Public Safety Plan
TABLE E6 – SAFETY ENHANCEMENT PROJECTIONS
Fiscal Year 2019/20 2020/21 2021/22 2022/23 2023/24 2024/25 2025/26 2026/27 Revenues
Taxes 43,442,517 42,526,942 43,136,074 45,972,950 46,432,680 46,897,006 47,365,976 47,839,636 Transaction and Use Tax - 5,190,100 15,950,972 17,000,000 17,170,000 17,341,700 17,515,117 17,690,268 Licenses & Permits 1,978,250 1,998,033 2,018,013 2,038,193 2,058,575 2,079,161 2,099,952 2,120,952 Fines and Forfeitures 162,300 163,923 165,562 167,218 168,890 170,579 172,285 174,008 Intergovernmental 77,500 78,275 79,058 79,848 80,647 81,453 82,268 83,090 Charges for Services 3,142,468 3,205,317 3,269,424 3,334,812 3,401,508 3,469,539 3,538,929 3,609,708 Investment Income 867,538 876,214 884,976 893,825 902,764 911,791 920,909 930,118 Pass Through 5,609,000 5,665,090 5,721,741 5,778,958 5,836,748 5,895,115 5,954,067 6,013,607 Transfers In 52,000 52,520 53,045 53,576 54,111 54,653 55,199 55,751 Cost Allocations Received 8,196,734 8,360,669 8,527,882 8,698,440 8,872,408 9,049,857 9,230,854 9,415,471 Misc. Revenue 579,212 585,004 590,854 596,763 602,730 608,758 614,845 620,994 Total Revenues 64,107,519 68,702,086 80,397,601 84,614,583 85,581,061 86,559,611 87,550,401 88,553,603 Expenditures
Personnel 23,119,413 23,812,995 24,527,385 25,263,207 26,021,103 26,801,736 27,605,788 28,433,962 Sherrif Contract 27,733,208 29,100,523 30,555,549 32,083,327 33,687,493 34,698,118 35,739,061 36,811,233 Sherrif Services
Enhancement 5,980,000 6,279,000 6,592,950 6,790,739 6,994,461 7,204,294 Fire Services Enhancement 1,866,000 1,410,000 1,369,200 1,174,200 1,209,426 1,257,803 1,308,115 Code Compliance
Enhancement 1,004,200 653,020 672,611 692,789 713,573 734,980 Animal Control
Enhancement 659,700 339,040 349,211 359,688 370,478 381,593 Operations and Maintenance 12,151,096 12,438,386 12,749,346 13,068,080 13,394,782 13,729,651 14,072,892 14,424,715 Debt Service 230,710 230,710 230,710 230,710 250,000 250,000 250,000 250,000 Total Operating
Expenditures 63,234,427 67,448,615 77,116,890 79,285,583 82,142,349 84,532,146 87,004,056 89,548,892 Capital 1,676,648 502,000 502,000 502,000 502,000 502,000 502,001 502,002 Total Expenditures 64,924,920 67,950,615 77,618,890 79,787,583 82,644,349 85,034,146 87,506,057 90,050,894 Surplus/(Deficit) (817,401) 751,472 2,778,710 4,827,000 2,936,712 1,525,465 44,344 (1,497,290) Cash VMUS Loan Payment 1,000,000 1,000,000 1,000,000 1,000,000 1,000,000 700,000 General Fund Reserves 12,995,004 14,746,476 18,525,186 24,352,186 28,288,898 30,514,364 30,558,708 29,061,417 General Fund Reserve
Requirement (15%) 9,864,344 10,319,454 11,770,964 12,097,549 12,527,358 12,887,135 13,259,242 13,642,301 Surplus Reserve for
Capital 3,130,660 4,427,022 6,754,222 12,254,637 15,761,540 17,627,229 17,299,466 15,419,117
Table E6 above, highlights revenues exceeding expenditures for the first six years of the model, with deficit spending projected to take place in the 26/27 fiscal year. The general fund reserve is exceeded through the 26/27 fiscal year, reaching a peak general fund reserv e fund surplus of $17.6 million in the 24/25 fiscal year. This surplus can be used for general discretionary purposes of the City Council while still maintaining its general fund reserve target, however, beginning in the 26/27 fiscal year, some form or general fund reserve or service level reduction will be required to balance the budget. To illustrate the projected life of the general fund, presuming general fund surplus revenues are not spent for other discretionary purposes, this model projects that it c ould deficit spend before running out of general fund cash in the 31/32 fiscal year. Table E6 above has been prepared for illustration purposes and contains a variety of assumptions that should be evaluated annually to more appropriately de termine public safety
Public Safety Plan
services. Finally, to pursue a General Transactions and Use Tax, in the upcoming election, the Council should be mindful of the following schedule established by the San Bernardino County Registrar of Voters:
Tasks
Receive Resolution E-116 Jul 10, 2020 E-88 Aug 7, 2020
Prepare Notice of Election E-115 Jul 11, 2020 E-87 Aug 8, 2020 1st day of publication in the newspaper E-109 Jul 17, 2020 E-81 Aug 14, 2020 Impartial Analysis E-106 Jul 20, 2020 @ 5pm E-78 Aug 17, 2020 @ 5pm Deadline for Arguments E-106 Jul 20, 2020 @ noon E-78 Aug 17, 2020 @ noon Deadline for Rebuttals E-102 Jul 24, 2020 @ 5pm E-74 Aug 21, 2020 @ 5pm End of 10-day public examination period
for Arguments E-96 Jul 30, 2020 @ noon E-68 Aug 27, 2020 @ noon end of 10-day public examination period
for Rebuttals E-92 Aug 3, 2020 @ 5pm E-64 Aug 30, 2020 @ 5pm Measure Letter assignment E-85
Measure withdrawal E-83
Submitted by E-88Submitted by E-116
Aug 10, 2020 @ 11am
Aug 12, 2020 @5pm
ESTABLISHED DEADLINES FOR MEASURES
Measure deadlines
Public Safety Plan
EXHIBIT A
Public Safety Plan
EXHIBIT A1
8 BEAT SYSTEM
Public Safety Plan
EXHIBIT A2
9 BEAT SYSTEM
Public Safety Plan
EXHIBIT A3
10 BEAT SYSTEM
Public Safety Plan
EXHIBIT A4
0 20,000
40,000
60,000
80,000
100,000
120,000
53,598
45,000
35,799
27,460
22,703
21,008
27,776
45,189
69,575
79,566
85,365
92,506
95,963
97,053
100,020
102,470
97,622
92,179
85,512
82,090
83,636
78,630
72,078
62,821
2008 - 2019 Total Calls-for-Service by
Time-of-Day
Public Safety Plan
EXHIBIT A5
Public Safety Plan
EXHIBIT B1
Public Safety Plan
EXHIBIT B2
Public Safety Plan
EXHIBIT B3
APPARATUS TYPING
Federal Emergency Management Agency (FEMA) has established defined categories of fire apparatus to ensure common terminology and characteristics in mutual aid planning. NFPA 1901 provides further standards on each type
TYPE 1 STRUCTURE ENGINE
Typical Type 1 Engine
A Type 1 Structure Engine is de signed for structural
fire fighting. Minimum requirements include a pump
that operates at 1000 gallons per minute (gpm), a 300-
gallon water tank, 1200 ft. 2 1/2″ hose, 400 ft. 1 1/2 ” hose, 200 ft. 1″ hose, 20 + feet of ladder, a 500 gpm
Master Stream. Typ e 1 engines are designed to
operate on paved roads. Type 1 engines carry
specialized equipment to support their structure,
medical and rescue mission areas. Currently, the City
operates with four frontline Type 1 engines. Type 1
engines are staffed with a minimum of three qualified
personnel.
Public Safety Plan
TYPE 3 WILDLAND ENGINE
Typical Type 3 Engine
TYPE 6 ENGINE/PATROL
Typical Type 6 Engine
Type 3 Wildland Engines are designed to support fire
suppression operations in off -road or areas difficult to access. Type 3 engines are a four -wheel drive for off - road capability. NFPA 1906 establishes standards for
Type 3 engines. Minimums include 150 g pm pumping
capability, a large 500 -gallon water tank, 1000 ft. 1
1/2″ hose, 800 ft. 1″ and a complement of wildland
tools. Type 3 engines are capable of a technique
referred to as pump -and-roll. This is a tactic where the vehicle drives with the pump eng aged while vehicle -
mounted turrets and nozzles are able to apply water on
a fire. Type 3 engines are staffed with a minimum of
three qualified personnel. Currently, the City operates with two Type 3 engines that are 25 years old and have
proven to be unreliable in operation.
Type 6 Engines have a smaller configuration that is
mounted on a heavy -duty four -wheel-drive pickup
truck frame. Type 6 engines have maneuverability in
areas that may be difficult to access by Type 3
engines. Type 6 units carry 50 -350 gallons of water
with pumping capability. Type 6 engines can be used
for size up and initial attack operations. Type 6
engines can be equipped with medical and rescue
equipment. Type 6 engines are staffed with a
minimum of two qualified personnel. Currently, the
City does not operate a Type 6 engine.
Public Safety Plan
MEDIC SQUAD
Typical Medic Squad
WATER TENDER
Typical Water Tender
Medic squads are designed for response to medical
aid incidents. Medic squads do not have any fire
suppression capability beyond a fire extinguisher.
Medic squads are equipped with medical, rescue, and
fire suppression support equipment. Medic squads are
staffed with a minimum of two qualified personnel.
Currently, the City operates one medic squad and has
a second medic squad in reserve.
Water tenders are a specialized firefighting apparatus
designed for transporting water from a water source
to a fire scene. Water tenders are also capable of
drafting water from a stream, or lake. Water tenders
are used when there i s no water supply accessible by
other means. Water tenders utilize a small pump to
move wate r to fire engines. Water tenders can carry
between 1,000 – 3,000 gallons of water in single or
dual axle configurations. NFPA 1901 establishes
standards for water tender equipment. Currently, the
City does not own or operate a water tender.
Public Safety Plan
LADDER TRUCK/QUINT
Typical Type Ladder Truck Quint
AIRCRAFT RESCUE AND FIRE FIGHTING (ARFF)
Typical ARFF Apparatus
A Quint is an aerial apparatus that carries fire hose,
ground ladder, fire pump, a water tank, and a
mounted ladder device. NPFA Standard
1901establishes minimum standards including a
1,000 gpm fire pump, water tank of 300 gallons,
aerial ladder or elevating platform with a permanently
installed waterway, a complement of ground ladders
containing a minimum of 85 feet of ground ladders,
including at least: two extension ladders, one roof
ladder, and one attic ladder.
Currently, the City operates one quint (MT 311) and
has a ladder truck (T 314) in reserve status T314 is
strictly a ladder and does not have water or pumping
capability. This requires that a Type 1 engine be
assigned to T314 during any aerial suppression
operations. T314 is 19 years old.
An Aircraft Rescue and Fire Fighting (ARFF)
apparatus is a very specialized apparatus for use at
airports. Sometimes referred to as “Crash Rigs,” these
apparatus are specifically designed to quickly
suppress fire in the event of an aircraft crash or
incident. ARFF units are configured with water
tanks, foam, and dry chemical agents. Federal
Aviation Administration (FAA) establishes
requirements for airport index needs in ARFF
capability. Southern California Logistics Airport
(SCLA) currently has ARFF unit s that has exceeded
their lifespan and need to be replaced. An ARFF
apparatus carrying at least 3,000 gallons of water is
currently needed to meet apparatus needs.
Public Safety Plan
OES HAZMAT TYPE II
Typical OES HazMat Type II
First responders are capable of arriving on scene, evacuating, and basic decontamination of those who are contaminated. First responders have minimal capability for containing Hazardous Material incidents or rescuing victims. HMRT units augment first respo nder capabilities by responding in a fully equipped vehicle, identifying products, plugging leaks, and containing runoff.
A Type 2 Hazardous Materials Response Team
(HMRT) is an organized group of firefighters trained
as hazardous materials technicians that respond to
chemical, biological, radiological and other hazardous
materials incidents. They have the training needed to
detect, i dentify, and contain these incidents using
specialized tools and methods. The Haz Mat Unit is a
self contained response vehicle capable of bringing a
mobile lab and other equipment directly to the scene.
Public Safety Plan
EXHIBIT C
INSPECTION TIME ANALYSIS
Work days: 208
Annual Work Hours: 2080
Holiday hours: -108
Minimum Vacation hours: -80
Anticipated Sick days 7 days: -56
Total lunch hours: -104
Approx Training (10 days X 8 hrs): -80
Meetings and Planning: -104
_____________________________________________________________ Expected annual work hours: 1548 (92,880 minutes per year)
FINAL ANALYSIS OF OFFICER INSPECTIONS TIME FOR CASES
• Average of 6 (NOV inspections) per day
• 1548 hrs / 8 hour day = 194 total inspection days
• 194 total inspection days x 6 inspections per day= 1,164 case inspections per year • 1,164 / 2 (minimum number of inspection per case) = 582 max cases per officer • 582 cases x 7 officers = 4,074 (max cases that Code Compliance can currently handle with 7 officers)
• 2019 calendar year case total of 5,902.
• 1,828 cases (shortfall of only calendar year 2019 cases. Does not include prior year roll over cases)
NOTES AND ASSUMPTIONS:
• Analysis below based on a 8 hour day (7.5 work hours with .5 hour paid lunch) • Additional time related to researching building permits, license or other City land use permits is not considered in the inspection time analysis below.
• Additional time related to police or fire request that would extend stated inspection times is not considered in the inspection time analysis below.
• Time related to voice mail, email correspondence or front counter meetings between officers and property owners/ complainants is not considered in the inspection time analysis below • Analysis below based on a first year employee
ADDITIONAL OFFICER TIME RELATED TO AN INSPECTION ACTIONS:
• Research parcel for property owner phone number if case is urgent (10 minutes each case) • Research permits or land use documents and confer with Engineering, Building or Planning Departments (if needed) (15 minutes each case)
• Return phone calls from complainants and or property owner (15 minutes average each case)
Public Safety Plan
• Reply to emails from complainants, property owners or property management related to the case (10 minutes average each case)
• Meet with complainants and or property owner at the counter (10 minutes each case) • Total average additional inspection time (excluded abatement action) (12 minutes each case) • Abatement scope creation, contractor bids, warrant writing, legal review and procurement ( 3 hours each case)
TIME ANALYSIS FOR EACH NOTICE OF VIOLATION INSPECTION
Event Average Time
(minutes) Note
Inspection preparation
15 Access system. Familiarize with basis for case and
establish priority. Verify property ownership. Verify
occupancy and license status (if rental). Verify prior
property history. Verify permits or other City
approvals (if relevant) and add to daily inspection
route.
Travel 15
Travel to inspection location from City Hall or last
inspection location to new inspection location
Inspection, resident
interaction and Energov
(app) field usage 20
Assess violation. Take photographs. Establish
contact and discuss violations. Issue written Notice
of Violation. Access app, upload pictures. Update
inspection notes.
Create case violations,
create mail notification,
verify other compliance
requirements, update case
work flow 15
Populate case violations in Energov, tailor required
corrective actions. Access County database to verify
current property owner mailing information, print
and prepare for mail service. Create next case
inspection.
TOTAL 65
+added inspection actions 12
Total NOV inspections per
day
7.5 hrs (450 min /
77 min= 5.8 NOV
inspections
Public Safety Plan
TIME ANALYSIS FOR EACH NOTICE OF PENDENCY (NOP) INSPECTION Event Average Time
(minutes) Note
Inspection preparation 10
Access system. Familiarize with basis for case and
establish priority. Verify current property ownership.
Verify occupancy and license status (if rental and if
application submitted for the unlicensed rental).
Verify permits or other City approvals (if relevant
and if obtained) add to daily inspection route.
Travel 10 Travel to inspection location from City Hall or last inspection location to new inspection location
Inspection, resident
interaction and Energov
(app) field usage
15 Assess resolution of violation. Take added
photographs. Attempt contact and discuss
outstanding violations. Access app, upload pictures.
Update inspection notes.
Create case violations,
create mail notification,
verify other compliance
requirements, update case
work flow
10 Populate violations, tailor required corrective actions.
Access County database to verify current property
owner mailing information, print and prepare letter
for mail.
Prepare Notice of
Pendency to record with
County Recorder
3 Print NOP via Energov
Update case work flow.
Schedule next inspection 2 Complete next step of work flow TOTAL 50
+added inspection actions 12
Total NOV inspections per
day
7.5 hrs (450 min /
62 min= 7.3 NOV
inspections
Public Safety Plan
TIME ANALYSIS FOR EACH CITATION INSPECTION
Event Average Time
(minutes) Note
Inspection preparation 10
Access system. Familiarize with basis for case and
establish priority. Verify current property ownership.
Verify occupancy and license status (if rental and if
application submitted for the unlicensed rental).
Verify permits or other City approvals (if relevant
and if obtained) Determine appropriate penalty (fine)
level. Consider best route.
Travel 10 Travel to inspection location from City Hall or last inspection location to new inspection location
Inspection, resident
interaction and Energov
(app) field usage
15 Assess status of violation. Take added photographs.
Attempt contact to issue citation. Prepare citation.
Issue citation. Access app, upload pictures. Update
inspection notes.
Update violation, Verify
PIMS ownership, mail
citation and mail
notification
10 Populate violations, update case with asses fines,
mail copy of citation to violator and citation servicing vendor (Citation Processing Center). If citation is to be mailed, complete service declaration and prepare
for mail service.
Update case work flow.
Schedule next inspection 3 Complete next step of work flow TOTAL 48
+added inspection actions 12
Total NOV inspections per
day
7.5 hrs (450 min /
60 min= 7.5 Cite
inspections