City of Culver City, California
City Council Agenda Item Report
RECOMMENDATION:
Staff recommends the City Council receive a presentation from staff related to the
City’s Animal Care and Control Program and direct staff to: (1) continue working
with the County of Los Angeles Department of Animal Care and Control
(LACDACC), the City’s Animal Care and Control Contractor, in implementing
program enhancements to improve service delivery and licensing compliance of dog
owning households, (2) evaluate the services provided by LACDACC for the
remainder of FY 2005-2006, and (3) report to Council its findings after the evaluation
period concludes.
BACKGROUND:
On August 8
th
, 2005, City Council authorized a contract for animal care and control
services with LACDACC through the term of June 30
th
, 2007 (Attachment 1). That
contract was fully executed on September 13, 2005 and includes a cancellation
provision with 90 days’ notice. Council also directed staff to present animal care and
control program options to improve service delivery for Council to review and discuss
and to report to Council in ninety (90) days on the following items:
1. Implement a canvassing effort in Culver City by LACDACC at a cost not to
exceed $15,000.00 for FY 2005-2006 and evaluate the results of said
program;
2. Add to the Westside Council of Governments meeting agenda an item
regarding animal control services in member cities;
3. Contact the City of Santa Monica regarding the use of their shelter; and,
Meeting Date: 01/09/06 Item Number: A-2
AGENDA ITEM: Animal Care and Control Program Issues and Options
Contact Person/Dept.: Akil Manley /
Shelly Chagnon
Phone Number: (310) 253-6015 /
(310) 253-6008
Fiscal Impact: Yes [] No [X] General Fund: Yes [] No [X]
Public Hearing: [] Action Item: [X] Attachments: [X]
Public Notification: Friends of Culver City Animals; Los Angeles Society for the
Prevention of Cruelty to Animals; Los Angeles County Department of Animal Care and
Control (01/05/06)
Department Approval:
Martin Cole (01/05/06)
CAO Approval:
Martin Cole for Jerry Fulwood (01/05/06)
City Controller Approval:
Marlee Chang (01/05/06)City of Culver City, California
City Council Agenda Item Report
4. Form a working group to study animal care and control issues, including the
costs of implementing a City owned and operated animal care and control
program in the City.
DISCUSSION:
Program Overview
Since 1998, the City has contracted for animal care and control services with
LACDACC. Currently, the shelter services provided under this contract are based at
the LACDACC’s shelter located in the City of Gardena (the Carson Shelter),
approximately 16 miles south of Culver City.
Overall Employee Deployment
Twenty-seven (27) LACDACC employees are assigned to operate the Carson
Shelter. The following table provides information on the types of employees
assigned to the Carson Shelter:
Employees of the Carson Shelter
POSITION TYPE NO. OF
EMPLOYEES
Animal Shelter Aids (Field and Shelter Operations) 8
Animal Control Officers (Field Operations) 13
Administrative and Managerial Staff
(Field and Shelter Operations)|1010|Veterinarian (Shelter Operations) 1
TOTAL STAFF 27
Operationally, the Animal Care and Control Program is divided into three service
areas: Sheltering Operations, Field Operations and Licensing Services. Each is
discussed in depth below.
Sheltering Operations
Sheltering Operations provide for the care of stray animals received primarily from
ACOs, and, to a lesser extent, the general public. The Carson Shelter has a staff of
thirteen (13) directly supporting shelter operations. The shelter is open to the public
from Monday through Thursday from 12 pm – 7 pm, and Friday and Saturday, 10 am
– 5 pm. To assist with reuniting unidentified stray animals with their owners and to
assist with pet adoptions, stray animals’ pictures are posted via LACDACC’s
website. Following are the shelter statistics over the last three years.City of Culver City, California
City Council Agenda Item Report
Sheltering Operations Statistics
SERVICE PROVIDED 7/1/02 -
6/30/03
7/1/03 -
6/30/04
7/1/04 -
6/30/05
Dogs Impounded 89 78 81
Cats Impounded 84 87 104
Other (Animal) Impounded 138 128 185
Private Veterinarian Care 13 5 5
Observation 2 2 0
Animals Placed in New Homes 42 21 38
Animals Returned to Owners 15 28 26
Field Operations
Field Operations are designed primarily for the protection of the Culver City
community and encompass responding to calls for stray, sick, injured, or dead
domestic or wild animals, investigation and enforcement of animal cruelty cases,
barking dog and vicious dog complaints. The services are delivered twenty-four (24)
hours a day, seven (7) days a week.
On a daily basis, four (4) to six (6) Animal Control Officers (ACOs) are assigned to
field duties in five (5) animal control zones in the Carson Shelter service area.
Culver City is part of the Mid-Cities zone, which comprise the cities of West
Hollywood and Beverly Hills.
When a request for service is received by the Carson Shelter, an ACO patrolling a
specific zone is dispatched to pick up animals and, if possible, return them to their
owners if the animal is wearing an identification tag. If animals do not have
identification tags, they are taken to the Carson Shelter were pets can be claimed by
their owners. Following are service statistics from the last three Fiscal Years.
Field Operations Statistics
SERVICE PROVIDED 7/1/02-
6/30/03
7/1/03-
6/30/04
7/1/04-
6/30/05
Service Request 951 964 1,045
Field Hours 1001:15 822:30 812:30
Citations Issued 23 11 6
Humane Investigations 16 14 25
Dead Animal 169 172 229
Court Appearances (Hours) 6:00 4:00 5:45City of Culver City, California
City Council Agenda Item Report
Licensing and Canvassing Services
LACDACC is also charged with receiving and collecting mandatory dog license and
voluntary cat identification fees to offset the cost associated with the City’s animal
care and control program. This service entails obtaining all necessary requirements
before issuing the dog licenses and cat identifications (such as rabies vaccination
certification). LACDACC also handles the annual license renewal process. Once a
dog license has been issued or renewed, courtesy renewal notices are sent out
annually to compliant households. Once a dog owning household is deemed out of
compliance for one (1) year by LACDACC, annual renewal notices are no longer
sent out to the household, and fines and penalties accrue. City staff has begun to
investigate alternatives to modify the County-administered license renewal program
to increase compliance among dog owning households and to realize revenue to
more fully offset costs of the program. The City also procures canvassing services
from LACDACC at a cost of $45.69 per hour to keep records updated, and to
increase the percentage of compliance with the City’s requirement to have dogs
licensed.
In FY 2004-2005, 1,900 licenses were sold, generating $33,945 in revenue with no
canvassing effort undertaken. In comparison, a citywide canvassing was carried out
in FY 2002-2003, in which 3,900 licenses were sold, generating $73,210 in license
revenue to the City.
License Services and Canvassing Statistics
SERVICE PROVIDED 7/1/02-
6/30/03
7/1/03-
6/30/04
7/1/04-
6/30/05
License Revenue $73,210.00 $31,832.50 $33,945.00
Licenses Sold 3,736 1,745 1,900
Canvassing (Hours) 1023:00 5:00 0:00
Cost of the Current Program
In reviewing the City’s animal care and control expenditures for the last three (3)
Fiscal Years, the average net animal care and control program costs were $28,906.
The following table shows a history of the total revenues less costs for LACDACC
services.City of Culver City, California
City Council Agenda Item Report
Cost of Program Overview
Fiscal Year
Total
Revenue (1)
Field
Service Cost
(2)
Net Housing
Services Cost (3)
Net Animal
Control Program
Cost (4)
2002-2003 (5) $73,210.00 $100,613.74 $7,175.49 $34,579.23
2003-2004 $31,832.50 $49,459.87 $6,480.30 $24,107.67
2004-2005 $33,945.00 $52,313.30 $9,664.70 $28,033.00
Notes:
(1) Revenue: License and Penalty Fees Collected.
(2) Field Service Cost: License Handling Cost, Canvassing Cost, Animal Control
Officer Cost (pick up/transport of animals).
(3) Housing Services Cost: Shelter and veterinary services less housing fees paid by
pet owners.
(4) Net Animal Control Program Cost = Total Revenue – Field Service Cost – Net
Housing Services Cost (Expenditures).
(5) Citywide canvassing was conducted.
It should also be noted that in response to the ongoing General Fund contribution to
the Animal Care and Control Program, the City Council increased fees that were fully
reflected in Fiscal Year 2005-2006 in an effort to make the Program more self-
supporting.
CITY COUNCIL DIRECTIVES UPDATE
Below is an update to Council concerning the directives staff received at the August |1010|th
, 2005 Council meeting.
1. Canvassing program
At a cost of $15,000, between the dates of October 19
th
to November 5
th
,
2005 LACDACC performed a door-to-door canvassing, covering
approximately one-third (1/3) of the households in the City that were out of
compliance. Canvassers used a walking index based upon LACDACC
records. The canvassing effort brought an additional 831 households into
compliance and generated a total of $24,545 in licensing and late fee
revenues. Approximately, two-thirds (2/3) of the City remains to be
canvassed.City of Culver City, California
City Council Agenda Item Report
2. Westside Council of Governments (COG)
Shortly after the August 8
th
Council meeting, the CAO brought up the issue of
animal care and control at the Westside COG City Manager’s meeting.
Other City Managers indicated their consensus to continue to pursue animal
care and control services individually within their own cities and were not
interested in exploring other options at this time. Further, there was no
consensus to add to the COG agenda a discussion of animal care and
control.
3. City of Santa Monica and the Los Angeles Society for the Prevention of
Cruelty to Animals (SPCALA) Shelter Operations
Staff contacted the City of Santa Monica to explore the possibility of
partnering with Santa Monica and utilizing their sheltering operations for
Culver City use. Santa Monica has stated it is not prepared to take on
additional animals through its city-operated program and shelter. SPCALA
was also contacted by staff regarding the possibility of contracting with them
for sheltering services. SPCALA submitted their preliminary proposal for the
use of their Hawthorne shelter. SPCALA provided staff with an annual cost
estimate of $29,120, which is approximately four (4) times greater than the
three (3) year average cost the City has paid annually for sheltering services.
4. Animal Control Working Group
A working group was formed and comprised of City staff and members of
Friends of Culver City Animals to investigate program issues, including the
costs of implementing an animal care and control program in the City. The
working group met three times on the following dates: September 22
nd
,
November 10
th
, and December 22
nd
, 2005.
CITY PROGRAM ENHANCEMENTS
Over the past four (4) months, staff has taken the following steps to improve the
service delivery of the City’s animal care and control program and to provide
appropriate oversight to the program.
1. Animal Care and Control Webpage
Staff has revised the City’s Animal Care and Control website to make it more
user-friendly and current. The web page disseminates information and
educates interested parties with critical information on the City program, City of Culver City, California
City Council Agenda Item Report
providing information regarding commonly asked questions, information about
the Carson Shelter, its location and hours of operation, request for service,
ordinances, and licensing services available at City Hall. The website has
links to LACDACC’s on-line report/complaint form through their website,
which allows residents to submit their concerns at times convenient to their
schedule. Also, there are links to online photos to assist pet owners in
recovering their missing animals. The City’s animal care and control website
is accessible at http://www.culvercity.org/citygov/animal_services.html.
2. Animal Care and Control Liaison Program
Staff has implemented an animal care and control liaison program, to assist
resolving resident grievances and provide citizens with a better customer
service experience, while evaluating animal control issues and program’s
effectiveness. Through the program, residents can contact staff during
operating hours or leave a message to resolve conflicts and other relevant
issues of pet owners and persons living in the City’s service area. To notify
residents of the liaison program and contact information, advertisements were
placed in the Culver City News on December 1
st
, 2005 and Culver City
Observer on December 8
th
, 2005, and postcards were sent to approximately
2,300 dog owning households.
Since notifying residents of the liaison program, staff has received twenty-
three (23) calls from residents. A significant portion of the calls were either
request for service or animal control inquires / questions. The following table
reflects the type of calls received.
Summary of Calls Received
TYPE OF CALL NO. OF
CALLS
Request for Service 12
Animal Control Inquiries / Questions 7
Complaint : Licensing Renewals 2
Complaint: Service Delivery 2
TOTAL 23
IDENTIFIED PROGRAM ISSUES
In evaluating the program in its totality, staff has received valuable feedback and
comments from members of Friends of Culver City Animals and individuals in City of Culver City, California
City Council Agenda Item Report
identifying animal care and program issues. The issues identified have been
grouped into three categories below.
1. Sheltering Operations
The distance to the Carson Shelter
Posting of lost pet photos in a timely manner to reunite pets with owners
2. Field Operations
Extended periods of time on-hold, causing of drop-out calls from residents
requesting service
Unorganized and unsympathetic customer service
Delayed request for service response times
3. Licensing Services
The processing of license renewals in a timely manner
High rate of dog owning households out of compliance
In identifying and attempting to resolve the issues above, staff has met with
LACDACC to discuss program issues. In our discussions, LACDACC notified staff
that they are implementing program enhancements, which are briefly discussed
below, that will address service delivery issues.
1. Downey Call Center, Effective - December 27
th
, 2005
The new Downey Call Center, with Voice over Internet Protocol (VOIP)
technology, will receive calls from Culver City residents when they call the
Carson Shelter requesting assistance. The Downey Call Center is staffed with
experienced operators and dispatchers to improve customer service and
telephone etiquette, with a Supervisor on-site to provide appropriate oversight.
Every telephone call received by the Call Center will be recorded to help ensure
quality service.
2. Dedicated ACO to the Mid-Cities Zone, Effective - January 3
rd
, 2006
LACDACC has also indicated that with the new Call Center, a more efficient use
of staff will allow an increase of ACOs to be deployed in the field between the
hours of 9:00 am - 5:30 pm. Previously, there has been one ACO to cover the
Mid-Cities and South Central animal control zones. With the implementation of
the Call Center, the Mid-Cities zone, which comprise the cities of Culver City,
Beverly Hills, and West Hollywood, will have one dedicated officer to the area.
LACDACC estimates that the bulk of hours spent will be concentrated in Culver
City. City of Culver City, California
City Council Agenda Item Report
3. Additional ACO for Night Shift Coverage, Effective - January 7
th
, 2006
An additional ACO will be deployed to cover requests for service from 5:30 pm to
6:30 am, increasing the number of ACO’s to cover the Carson Shelter’s service
area in its entirety from one (1) to two (2).
4. Animal Licensing to be Contracted to the Los Angeles County Treasurer
and Tax Collector, Effective - April 2006
LACDACC is planning to contract their licensing services to the Los Angeles
County Treasurer and Tax Collector to gain operational efficiencies and improve
service delivery. With the proposed change, license renewals and fees will be
received, processed, and tracked by the Los Angeles County Treasurer and Tax
Collector throughout the year. LACDACC has estimated that the turn around time
to process a license renewal will be within a week.
PROGRAM OPTIONS
Because of the confluence of program components that affect the service delivery
residents experience, staff has developed and presented program options and staff
recommendations in the following categories: Sheltering Operations, Field
Operations, Canvassing, and Licensing Services.
1. Sheltering Operations
Currently, the SPCALA sheltering facility in Hawthorne is the only alternative
sheltering option available to the City. With this option, it is estimated that it would
increase the City’s sheltering annual cost by $21,347, an increase of 300%.
Staff recommends that Council direct staff to further evaluate sheltering operations
and options for the remainder of Fiscal Year 2005/2006 and to report to Council after
the investigation period concludes.
2. Field Operations
Option One: City Operated Part-time Animal Control Program, 7:30 am -
5:30 pm, Weekdays Coverage Only
One ACO position would be created to provide field operation services during
weekdays from 7:30 am - 5:30 pm. One regular part-time Administrative Clerk
position would be created to provide administrative support to the program
(Attachment 2).City of Culver City, California
City Council Agenda Item Report
Budgetary Impact: $83,427 Start-up Costs / $138,178 Annual Costs
Pros:
1. Operational efficiencies would be improved, increasing the quality
of service
Cons:
1. Significant budgetary impact
2. Service delivery gaps will exist from 7:30 am - 5:30 pm and
weekends
3. Program would have to expand to meet service gaps (for times
between 7:30 am - 5:30 pm and on weekends
Option Two: City Operated 24-hour, 7 Days a Week Animal Control Program
Option Two entails creating five (5) ACO positions to provide a 24 hour, seven (7)
day a week animal control program. One full-time Administrative Secretary position
and one full-time Supervisor position will be created to provide administrative
support and oversight to the program (Attachment 3).
Budgetary Impact: $87,281 Start-up Costs / $542,566 Annual Costs
Pros:
1. Operational efficiencies would be improved and the quality of service
delivery would be significantly increased
Cons:
1. Significant budgetary impact
Option Three: Evaluate LACDACC’s Field Operations Program Enhancement
for remainder of Fiscal Year 2005/2006 and Report Findings to Council
Staff would continue the animal control liaison program, evaluate the County’s
program enhancement the remainder of Fiscal Year 2005/2006, and report to
Council after the evaluation period concludes.
Budgetary Impact: None
Pros:
1. No budgetary impact
2. Provide oversight to ensure quality of service delivery City of Culver City, California
City Council Agenda Item Report
Cons:
1. Service quality may not improve as quickly as implementing City
operated program (although implementation of a City operated
program would also need some start-up time for purchase of
needed equipment and hiring of necessary staff)
Detailed costs estimates for these various options are attached to this report.
The attached cost estimated show two ends of a spectrum of potential services. The
lower cost estimate employs one animal control officer and associated support costs
with services provided five (5) days per week. The higher cost estimate is a full-
service program operated seven (7) days a week, 24 hours a day. An average of
the operational costs of the two programs is generally in line with animal control
programs in nearby cities which operate their own programs.
Staff recommends the City Council direct staff to evaluate LACDACC’s field
operations program enhancement for the remainder of Fiscal Year 2005/2006.
3. Canvassing
There are three options available to the City as it pertains to canvassing. The
intention of the canvassing effort is to keep records updated, enforce the
requirement to have dogs licensed, and to realize revenue to offset cost of the
animal care and control program.
Option One: Status Quo
Under Option One, current practices of canvassing would continue.
Budgetary Impact: No direct impact. Indirect impact of unrealized
revenues that could be realized if a periodic canvassing program were
implemented.
Pros:
1. No Direct Budgetary Impact
Cons:
1. Lost opportunity to structure a canvassing program to bring a
greater number of households into compliance
2. Indirect impact of foregone revenue due to non-compliance
3. Unfair to residents who comply with licensing programCity of Culver City, California
City Council Agenda Item Report
Option Two: Undertake Citywide Canvassing Effort on an Annual Basis
Conduct citywide canvassing effort annually to bring pet owners current on their
license fees.
Budgetary Impact: Direct increase in net revenue expected in first year.
However, diminishing returns over time will decrease the effectiveness of
ongoing annual canvassing which is expected to become a net expense in
second or third fiscal year.
Pros:
1. Greater number of dog-owning households would be in compliance
annually
2. Generate additional revenue to offset the cost of the program
Cons:
1. Over time, net revenue generated would diminish by canvassing
annually, likely becoming a net expense in the second or third fiscal
year
Option Three: Undertake Citywide Canvassing Effort on a Bi-Annual Basis
Conduct citywide canvassing efforts bi-annually to bring pet owners current on their
license fees. Therefore, the benefits and cost would be spread over a two-year
period.
Budgetary Impact: No net costs to City.
Pros:
1. No net fiscal impact expected
2. Greater number of dog owning households would be in compliance
Cons:
1. None
Staff recommends the City Council direct staff to work with County officials to
prepare a bi-annual canvassing program for potential presentation to City Council.City of Culver City, California
City Council Agenda Item Report
4. Licensing Services
Option One: Status Quo
Current practices of licenses would continue.
Budgetary Impact: No direct budgetary impacts. However, current
practices result in foregone revenues from increased license and late penalty
revenues.
Pros:
1. No Direct Budgetary Impact
Cons:
1. Lost opportunity to restructure the license renewal program to bring
households into compliance at a higher rate
2. No additional revenue would be generated to offset the cost of the
program
Option Two: Staff to Work with County Officials to Create a License
Renewal Program that would Bring Households into Compliance at a Higher
Rate, and Staff to Evaluate the County’s Licensing Program for the remainder
of Fiscal Year 2005/2006 and to Report Findings to Council
Budgetary Impact: Increased net revenue annually
Pros:
1. No budgetary impact
2. Greater number of dog owning households would be in compliance
3. Generate additional revenue to offset the cost of the program
Cons:
1. None
Staff recommends that Council direct staff to work with County officials to create a
license renewal program to bring a greater number of households into compliance,
to direct staff to evaluate the County’s licensing services program enhancements for
the remainder of Fiscal Year 2005/2006 and report to Council after the evaluation
period concludes. City of Culver City, California
City Council Agenda Item Report
Summary of Staff Recommendations
1. Sheltering Operations: Staff recommends that Council direct staff to
continue to investigate shelter operations and options over the remainder of
Fiscal Year 2005/2006 and to report to Council its findings after the
investigation period concludes.
2. Field Operations: Staff recommends that Council direct staff to evaluate
LACDACC’s field operations program enhancement for the remainder of
Fiscal Year 2005/2006 and to report to Council its findings after the evaluation
period concludes.
3. Canvassing: Staff recommends that Council direct staff to work with County
officials to create a bi-annual canvassing program beginning in FY 2006-
2007. Staff will make a formal budget request for these services at the time
when the budget is considered by the City Council.
4. Licensing Services: Staff recommends that Council direct staff to work with
County officials to create a license renewal program to bring households into
compliance at an increased rate, and to direct staff to evaluate the licensing
program for the remainder of Fiscal Year 2005/2006 and to report to Council
its findings after the evaluation period concludes.
FISCAL ANALYSIS:
Depending on the program options chosen the fiscal impact could be up to $596,686
annually. The staff recommendations in their totality will have no fiscal impact to the
City.
The City is also currently facing certain fiscal challenges. Pending a review of the
City’s fiscal position by the City Council, neither the CAO nor the City Controller
recommend implementation of new City programs at this time.
ATTACHMENTS:
1. Staff Report from August 8, 2005: Consideration of the Renewal of the Animal
Control Contract with Los Angeles County and Canvassing Program
2. Estimated Budget for City Operated Part-time Animal Control Program, 7:30 am -
5:30 pm, Weekdays Coverage Only
3. Estimated Budget for City Operated 24-hour, 7 Days a Week Animal Control
ProgramCity of Culver City, California
City Council Agenda Item Report
MOTION:
That the City Council:
1. Direct staff to continue the animal control and care liaison program;
2. Direct staff to continue to investigate shelter operations and options for the
remainder of Fiscal Year 2005/2006 and to report to Council its findings
after the investigation period concludes;
3. Direct staff to continue to work with County officials to create a bi-annual
canvassing program;
4. Direct staff to work with County officials to create a license renewal program
to bring households into compliance at an increased rate;
5. Direct staff to evaluate the licensing program for the remainder of Fiscal
Year 2005/2006 and to report to Council its findings after the evaluation
period concludes; and
6. Direct staff to evaluate that LACDACC’s field operations program
enhancement for the remainder of Fiscal Year 2005/2006 and to report to
Council its findings after the evaluation period concludes.
City of Culver City, California
City Council Agenda Item Report
RECOMMENDATION:
That the City Council authorize the Chief Administrative Officer to sign the proposed
contract (Attachment 1) with Los Angeles County for animal control services through
June 30, 2007 and approve the proposed canvassing recommendation.
BACKGROUND:
The City has been contracting with Los Angeles County’s Department of Animal
Care and Control (LACDAC) for the provision of animal control services for the past
seven years. Under this contract, LACDAC has rendered field services, sheltering
services (in Carson), and licensing services. LACDAC also conducts an annual
rabies clinic in Culver City. Each year, costs for LACDAC increase approximately 3-
5% based on service needs and cost recovery by the County. LACDAC also
conducts an annual rabies clinic in Culver City. LACDAC contracts with the
following cities and County areas to provide a combination of licensing and licensing
services:
Acton
Agoura
Agoura Hills
Agua Dulce
Alhambra
Altadena
Arcadia
Artesia
Azusa
Baldwin Park
Bassett
Bell
Beverly Hills
Bouquet Canyon
Bradbury
Brea
Calabasas
Calabasas
Canoga Park
Canyon Country
Carson
Castaic
Cerritos
Charter Oak
Chatsworth
City Terrace
Claremont
Compton
Covina
Cudahy
Culver City
Diamond Bar
Duarte
El Camino Village
El Monte
Fernwood
Florence/Firestone
Gardena
Glendora
Gorman
Green Valley
Hacienda Heights
Harbor City
Hawaiian Gardens
Hidden Hills
Industry
Inglewood
Irwindale
Meeting Date: 08/08/05 Item Number: A-3
AGENDA ITEM: Consideration of the Renewal of the Animal Control Contract
with Los Angeles County and Canvassing Program
Contact Person/Dept.: Shelly W. Chagnon Phone Number: (310) 253-6008
Fiscal Impact: Yes [X] No [] General Fund: Yes [X] No []
Public Hearing: [] Action Item: [X] Attachments: [X]
Public Notification:
Los Angeles County Animal Control (8/3/05) and Master Notification List (8/3/05).
Department Approval:
Jerry B. Fulwood (8/2/05)
CAO Approval:
Jerry B. Fulwood (8/3/05)
City Controller Approval:
Marlee Chang (8/3/05)
City of Culver City, California
City Council Agenda Item Report
Kagel Canyon
La Crescenta
La Habra
Heights
La Mirada
La Puente
La Verne
Ladera Heights
Lake Elizabeth
Lake Hughes
Lake Los
Angeles
Lancaster
Lawndale
Lennox
Leona Valley
Llano
Lomita
Los Angeles
(90001, 90002,
90008, 90022,
90023, 90063,
90032, 90043,
90044, 90047
90056, 90061)
Lynwood
Malibu
Marina Del Rey
Maywood
Monrovia
Montrose
Mt. Baldy
Newhall
Palmdale
Palmdale
Palos Verdes
Estates
Palos Verdes
Pasadena
Pearblossom
Quartz Hill
Rancho Palos
Verdes
Rolling Hills
Rolling Hills Estates
Rosemead
Rowland Heights
San Dimas
San Fernando
San Gabriel
San Pedro
Santa Clarita
Saugus
South El Monte
South San Gabriel
Stevenson Ranch
Temple City
Thousand Oaks
Topanga Canyon
Torrance
Tujunga
Universal Studios
Valencia
Valinda
Valyermo
Walnut
Walnut Park
West Covina
West Hollywood
Westlake Village
Whittier
Woodland Hills
On May 10, 2004, the City Council unanimously approved the contract renewal with
Los Angeles County for Animal Control Services for one year. On February 28,
2005, the City Council authorized dog license fee increases which have taken effect
beginning with the FY 05-06 dog license renewal period set by the County.
DISCUSSION:
LACDAC has provided the following service levels to the City of Culver City during
FY 04/05 to date as compared with FY 03/04 (Attachment 2):
Service Provided 7/1/03-6/30/04 7/1/04-6/30/05
Service Request 964 1045
Field Hours (Includes humane education hrs) 822:30 812:30
Dogs Impounded 78 81
Cats Impounded 87 104
Other (Animal) Impounded 128 185
Citations Issued 11 6
Private Veterinarian Care 5 5
Observation 2 0
Dead Animal 172 229
Humane Investigations 14 25
Court Appearances (Hours) 4:00 5:45
Animals Placed in New Homes 21 38
Animals Returned to Owners 28 26
Licenses Sold 1,745 1,900
Animal License Canvassing (Hours) 5:00 0:00
City of Culver City, California
City Council Agenda Item Report
The number of field hours can vary based on the amount of time required for each
service call. The following table shows a history of the total revenues less costs for
LACDAC services (Attachment 3).
Fiscal Year
Total Revenue
(1)
Field Service
Cost (2)
Net Housing
Services Cost
(3)
Net Animal
Control Program
Cost (4)
1999-2000 $61,974.00 $70,080.27 $5,436.56 $13,542.83
2000-2001 $52,619.00 $56,012.21 $8,309.32 $11,702.53
2001-2002 $27,987.50 $33,535.79 $6,717.19 $12,265.48
2002-2003 (5) $73,210.00 $100,613.74 $7,175.49 $34,579.23
2003-2004 $31,832.50 $49,459.87 $6,480.30 $24,107.67
2004-2005 $33,945.00 $52,313.30 $9,664.70 $28,033.00
Notes:
(1) Revenue: License and Penalty Fees Collected.
(2) Field Service Cost: License Handling Cost, Canvassing Cost, Animal Control
Officer Cost (pick up/transport of animals).
(3) Housing Services Cost: Shelter and veterinary services less housing fees paid
by pet owners.
(4) Net Animal Control Program Cost = Total Revenue – Field Service Cost – Net
Housing Services Cost (Expenditures).
(5) Very extensive canvassing services were performed.
Although LACDAC had some challenges this year in administering renewal notices
with complete updated Culver City license fees, LACDAC addressed its error by
mailing out revised notices to Culver City dog owners at LACDAC’s expense.
Although the City has had some issues overseeing LACDAC’s agreement, staff has
been able to overcome most of the issues in working with LACDAC staff. LACDAC’s
program has been cost effective to manage by the City, diverting minimal staff time
from other programs and projects.
Survey of Other Cities
The City of Culver City is one of the more than 40 cities in Los Angeles County that
contract with LACDAC for animal control services. The following table lists the costs
and types of services that are provided for by nearby cities in the County:
City of Culver City, California
City Council Agenda Item Report
City
FY 04-05
Net Animal
Control
Program
Cost (1) Comment
Beverly Hills
Pop. 35,088 $20,000
Contracts with County for services. Utilizes County shelter
(Carson).
Culver City
Pop. 39,896 $28,033
Contracts with County for services. Utilizes County
shelter (Carson).
El Segundo
Pop. 16,492 (2) $129,450
Has own program. Contracts with Society for the Prevention
of Cruelty to Animals (SPCA) (Hawthorne) for shelter services.
Hawthorne
Pop. 86,279 (2) $265,800
Has own program. Contracts with SPCA (Hawthorne) for
shelter services.
Lawndale
Pop. 32,436 $74,250
Has own program. Contracts with SPCA (Hawthorne) for
shelter services.
Manhattan Beach
Pop. 36,321 $215,416 Has own program. Utilizes County shelter (Carson).
Santa Monica
Pop. 87,823 $943,202 Has own program. Operates own shelter.
Torrance
Pop. 142,841 (2) $346,370 Has own program. Utilizes County shelter (Carson).
West Hollywood
Pop. 36,933 $34,800
Contracts with County for services. Utilizes County shelter
(Carson) and Contracts with SPCA (Hawthorne) for shelter
services.
(1) Unless otherwise stated, Net Animal Control Program Cost = Total Revenue –
Field Service Cost – Net Housing Services Cost (Expenditures).
(2) Costs represented here do not reflect license and penalty revenues, which were
not available at time of report.
As reflected in the table above, some cities in the region operate their own animal
care and control programs, often through their Police departments. The City of
Santa Monica operates its own program and shelter whereas cities, such as El
Segundo, Manhattan Beach and Torrance, operate their own programs and contract
for shelter services through LACDAC or SPCA.
As identified in the table above, the cities that operate their own programs have
larger operating budgets for animal care and control programs than those cities that
contract with LACDAC for services.
Animal Control Service Options
Staff compared LACDAC’S proposed services to those offered by other entities or
brought in house. These options fall within the categories of licensing, field services,
sheltering services, and dog license canvassing.
City of Culver City, California
City Council Agenda Item Report
Licensing
One option for animal licensing services is PetData. PetData is a private company
headquartered in Irving, Texas that provides dog licensing services for municipalities
and animal welfare agencies. PetData mails one or more renewal notices to owners
of dogs with expired licenses. The company utilizes whatever data is provided by
the municipality at the time of contracting for services, and has experience using
LACDAC data. In addition, PetData recommends that they or the City contact local
veterinarians to ask them to provide data on their patients with expired licenses and
to encourage patients to license their pets.
LACDAC currently retains $2.97 per license as a handling fee to cover its processing
costs. PetData is paid approximately $3.50-$3.75 on a per license basis. This fee
covers all of PetData’s costs, which include mailing, database maintenance and
communication to the City on a regular basis regarding licensing revenues and
statistics. PetData does not provide the actual dog license tags. Cities must
purchase the tags from an outside vendor. PetData advised that these tags typically
cost $0.05-$0.08 per tag. The City would be responsible for the cost of mailing tags
to pet owners.
The City of Torrance has been a client of PetData since June 2004. While Torrance
identifies an increased number of licenses, staff believes this is attributable to both
PetData and the City’s own significant telephone canvassing and field service
efforts. To bring PetData’s services to Culver City would require additional staff time
to coordinate the purchase of dog license tags and implement canvassing services,
which are not provided by PetData. Staff recommends keeping LACDAC’s pet
licensing services.
Field Services
LACDAC’s field services for Culver City include, but are not limited to, responding to
calls for stray or dead domestic or wild animals, barking dog and vicious dog
complaints. County staff are dispatched to pick up pets and whenever possible
return them to their owners if the animal is wearing an identification tag. If animals
do not have identification tags, they are taken to the LACDAC shelter in Carson
while they wait to be claimed by their owners. Staff believes that LACDAC’s field
services are more cost effective than bringing a program in house.
Shelter Services
At LACDAC’s Carson shelter, animals that are injured are cared for by a LACDAC
veterinarian and all animals are housed in the facility. Although Culver City currently
utilizes LACDAC’s Carson Shelter, the City, along with the Cities of West Hollywood City of Culver City, California
City Council Agenda Item Report
and Beverly Hills, contracted with SPCA to provide sheltering services at its facility
on Jefferson Boulevard in Los Angeles years ago. Although the Jefferson Shelter is
now closed, in 2004 City of Beverly Hills staff spoke with SPCA management who
indicated that the estimated annual cost to open the Jefferson facility would be
approximately $200,000. This figure would include services for the cities of Beverly
Hills, West Hollywood and Culver City. In the past few months, staff has requested
information several times regarding a proposed contracted cost for SPCA services
and has not received a formal reply from the SPCA. The information requested
included the feasibility of reopening the Jefferson Shelter or utilizing the Hawthorne
Shelter.
Dog License Canvassing
LACDAC states that door-to-door canvassing of Culver City takes 6 individuals a
total of approximately 1,000 hours. LACDAC’s canvassers, overseen by a
supervisor, go to the residences of pet owners with expired licenses and other
households where they notice a food dish out front, or hear a barking dog, or
suspect more than one dog in the home not accounted for with a license.
Canvassers use a walking index based upon LACDAC records for the purpose of
collecting license fees and penalties. LACDAC’s canvassers typically work 10-hour
days from Wednesday through Saturday and are compensated for mileage for using
their personal vehicles. In FY 2002-03, the last time LACDAC performed door-to-
door canvassing, it cost $39,232.50, and resulted in a total program cost of
$34,579.23 to the City for that year.
LACDAC staff indicated it is ideal to conduct canvassing efforts biannually to bring
pet owners current on their license fees through collection door-to-door. Therefore,
the benefits and cost would be spread over a two-year period. Staff believes it is
important for canvassing to be performed to keep records updated and enforce the
requirement to have dogs licensed in Culver City.
Other cities have utilized LACDAC to perform canvassing services. This spring,
LACDAC performed canvassing for the City of West Hollywood at a cost of
$32,348.52, irrespective of additional revenues collected as a result of the
canvassing.
Staff looked at opportunities to implement a new in-house door-to-door canvassing
program. Several cities, such as Torrance, utilize an in-house door-to-door
canvassing program through its Police Department. This type of program would be
costly to implement when considering the additional hiring of a Community Service
Officer and utilizing the services of sworn Police management on an overtime basis
to supervise this individual and this program. There would also be additional costs
and considerations for vehicle usage, cash handling through the collection of fees City of Culver City, California
City Council Agenda Item Report
and penalties, training, turnover and any additional liability borne by the City of
Culver City to implement an in-house program.
This type of program would not be practical to implement through Culver City’s
Police Department, because of current staffing reductions due to budget cuts in FY
2002-03 and FY 2003-04. Staffing levels in the Police Department have not been
brought up to past levels. Currently several duties previously performed by non-
sworn personnel are being handled by sworn officers. Staff does not recommend
bringing the canvassing program in-house because of current and future budget
considerations, which may not provide the opportunity to increase personnel. Some
of the benefits to having canvassing conducted by LACDAC staff include individuals
who are trained and supervised to conduct canvassing, handle cash, continue with
program consistency, and ensure that liability and legal services are covered within
the auspices of the County of Los Angeles.
Proposed Program Recommendation
Culver City’s newly adopted dog license fees could result in an approximate $12,710
increase in revenues to offset the existing program. However, it does not appear
that there would be sufficient funds to cover an increase in costs for a new animal
care and control program, if for example the City of Manhattan Beach model was
implemented. Manhattan Beach, a City with a population size similar to Culver City,
employs three Community Service Officers and contracts with LACDAC for
sheltering services. Manhattan Beach’s budget, after licensing revenues are
collected, totals $215,416.
In keeping with City’s practice of implementing projects and programs with ongoing
reliable funding sources, the most cost effective method to continue Culver City’s
animal care and control program would be to continue to contract with LACDAC.
Additionally, staff recommends requesting LACDAC to conduct dog license
canvassing for the City during this fiscal year at a projected cost of $27,000, a figure
which estimates a net cost after additional revenues are collected through
canvassing.
FISCAL ANALYSIS:
$30,000 was approved for Animal Control Services Approved in the FY 05-06
Budget. Staff recommends the proposed licensing and canvassing program to be
budgeted in the following manner:
City of Culver City, California
City Council Agenda Item Report
Estimated Increased Costs Canvassing Program as offset by
increased revenues for collection of fees and penalties: $27,000
Less projected increase in license fee revenues: $12,710
Total Net New Program Costs to include LACDAC Canvassing
for FY 2005-2006
$14,290
Staff proposes a one-time General Fund expenditure request of an amount not to
exceed $15,000 for additional Animal Control Costs. The benefit of this expenditure
will include a two-year period of FY 05-06 and FY 06-07. The additional money will
allow for any contingencies. Staff proposes using Appropriated Reserves to pay for
this program increase.
ATTACHMENTS:
1. Proposed Animal Control Services Agreement (Los Angeles County - The
City of Culver City)
2. Fiscal Year 2004-2005 Animal Control Program Cost
3. County of Los Angeles Department of Animal Care and Control – Animal
Control Program Cost for Fiscal Year 1999-2000 through Fiscal Year 2003-
2004
MOTION:
That the City Council:
1. Authorize the Chief Administrative Officer to execute the proposed contract with
Los Angeles County for animal control services through June 30, 2007; and
2. Recommend conducting increasing Animal Control Services to include
canvassing program provided by LACDAC at a cost not to exceed $15,000 for
FY 2005-06; or
3. Provide other direction to staff.
Animal Control Estimated Program Budget
COMMENTS
Salary - Animal Control Officer $47,154 $30,792 - $63,516 per officer Annual
Overtime Pay $5,000 Based on 4 hrs. per pay period (104 hrs/yr) Annual
Fringe Benefits - Animal Control Officer $21,219 $13,856 - $28,582 per officer = 45% of salary Annual
Salary - Supervisor ?? Annual
Fringe Benefits - Supervisor ?? Annual
Salary - Clerical $24,070 Regular Part-time Administrative Clerk @ 30 hours - Step A Annual
Fringe Benefits - Clerical $10,832 45% of salary Annual
Total Annual Personnel Expenses $108,275
Uniform expense $660 $660 per year Annual
Amortization charge $8,820 Vehicle replacement Fund Annual
Fuel $2,050
(32 mi./trip)(30 trips/mo.)=11,600 miles/yr
16 miles/gallon=725 gallons + 300 gals/yr for patrols @ $2/gal Annual
Garage charges (Maintenance) $1,000 $500 per van: will be increased as the van ages Annual
Phone - communication $600 $50/month for 1 cell phone Annual
Office Expense $200 Office supplies Annual
Printing, Binding, and Postage $6,000 20,000 postcard mailings/year Annual
Utilities $2,200 Gas, electric, water charges for 2 spaces Annual
Training & education (certification needed?) $600 $600/ea Annual
Liability Insurance ?? Increased risk exposure Annual
Total Annual Operating Expenses $22,130
Canvassing ?? Annual
Sheltering $7,773 3-year avg. of LA County Sheltering Cost Annual
After Hours Field Operations ?? Annual
Total Annual Contractual Expenses $7,773
Annual Sub-total Expenses $138,178
PC & software, printer purchase $1,500 one PC Start-up
Special equipment $1,927 ACO equipment and cages Start-up
Vehicle Purchase $80,000 2 Equipped Vans / Van: range from $34,000 - $46,000 Start-up
Start-up Expenses $83,427
Total Estimated Cost $221,605
Dog Licenses Renewals ($80,000) 2002-2003 Revenues $73,210 @ 10% Increase
Total Estimated Revenue ($80,000)
Net Cost $141,605
1 Full Time Animal Control Officer - In House
Animal Control Estimated Program Budget
Comments
Salary - Animal Control Officer $235,770 $30,792 - $63,516 per officer / 5 Officers Annual
Overtime Pay $5,000 4 hrs per pay period based on overlapping service Annual
Fringe. Benefits - Animal Control Officer $106,097 $13,856 - $28,582 per officer = 45% of salary Annual
Salary - Supervisor $67,715 $61,000 - $74,430 comparable to A - E Step PW Street Supversior Annual
Misc. Benefits - Supervisor $30,472 $16,627 - $34,299 per Supervisor = 45% of salary Annual
Salary - Clerical $39,179 Admin Secretary A Step Annual
Misc. Benefits - Clerical $17,631 45% of salary Annual
Total Annual Personnel Expenses $501,863
Uniform expense $3,960 $660 per year each officer Annual
Amortization charge $8,820 Vehicle Replacement Fund Annual
Fuel $3,250
(32 mi./trip)(30 trips/mo.)=11,600 miles/yr
16 miles/gallon=725 gallons + 900 gals/yr for patrols @ $2.00/gallon Annual
Garage charges $1,000 $500 per van: will be increased as the vans age Annual
Phone - communication $3,000 $50/month for 5 cell phones Annual
Office Expense $600 Office supplies Annual
Printing, Binding, and Postage $6,000 20,000 postcard mailings/year Annual
Utilities $3,300 Gas, electric, water charges for 3 office spaces Annual
Training & education $3,000 $600/ea Annual
Liability Insurance ?? Increased risk exposure Annual
Total Annual Operating Expenses $32,930
Canvassing ?? Annual
Sheltering $7,773 3-year avg. of LA County Sheltering Cost to the County Annual
Total Annual Contractual Expenses $7,773
Annual Sub-total Expenses $542,566
PC & Software, Printer Purchase $1,500 One PC Start-up
Special equipment $5,781 ACO equipment and cages Start-up
Vehicle Purchase $80,000 2 Equipped Vans Start-up
Start-up Annual Expenses $87,281
Total Estimated Cost $629,847
Dog Licenses Renewals ($80,000) 2002-2003 Revenues $73,210 @ 10% Increase
Total Estimated Revenue ($80,000)
Net Cost $549,847
24 HOUR IN-HOUSE ANIMAL CONTROL PROGRAM
Animal Control Program Option Costs
MEETING DATE: January 9, 2006
AGENDA ITEM: Animal Care and Control Program Issues and Options
ATTACHMENTS
Pages
1.
Staff Report from August 8, 2005: Consideration of the
Renewal of the Animal Control Contract with Los Angeles
County and Canvassing Program
1-8
2.
Estimated Budget for City Operated Part-time Animal
Control Program, 7:30 am - 5:30 pm, Weekdays Coverage
Only
9
3.
Estimated Budget for City Operated 24-hour, 7 Days a Week
Animal Control Program
10