City of Culver City, California
City Council Agenda Item Report
RECOMMENDATION:
The City Council Subcommittee on Animal Control recommends the City
Council (1) approve a contract with spcaLA for Animal Sheltering services;
and (2) consider various fees and charges related to animal care and
control.
(Approval of the Contract Requires a 4/5ths vote for the Budget
Amendment)
BACKGROUND:
The City of Culver City contracted with the spcaLA/Jefferson Boulevard
location for sheltering services from 1974 to 1999. This particular shelter
location was closed and recently re-opened as a spay and neutering
services facility (general sheltering services are not provided at this
location). In recent years, the City of Culver City has contracted with the
County of Los Angeles Department of Animal Care and Control
(LACDACC) for both sheltering services (at the LACDACC shelter located
in Carson) and field services (including services of the County’s Animal
Control Officers for field services in Culver City).
Meeting Date: 11/10/08 Item Number: A-1
AGENDA ITEM: Consideration of the Animal Control Subcommittee’s
Recommendation to Approve a Contract with SpcaLA for Animal Sheltering
Services and Discussion and Potential Implementation of Additional Related
Fees.
Contact Person/Dept.:
Martin R. Cole, Assistant City Manager
Don Pedersen, Police Chief
Phone Number:
(310) 253-6000
(310) phone number??
Fiscal Impact: Yes [X] No [] General Fund: Yes [X] No []
Public Hearing: [] Action Item: [X] Attachments: [X]
Public Notification:
spcaLA; County of Los Angeles Animal Care and Control; Friends of Culver City
Animals; Master E-Mail Notification List on 11/05/08.
Department Approval:
Martin R. Cole (11/05/08)
City Attorney Approval:
Carol Schwab (by H. Baker) (11/05/08)
Chief Financial Officer Approval:
Jeff Muir (by M. Noller) (11/05/08)
City Manager Approval:
Jerry B. Fulwood (11/05/08) City of Culver City, California
City Council Agenda Item Report
At a meeting of the City Council held on June 16, 2008 the City Council
adopted the following motion (the following is an excerpt from the minutes
of the meeting of June 16, 2008):
MOVED BY COUNCILMEMBER O’LEARY AND SECONDED BY
COUNCILMEMBER ARMENTA, THAT THE CITY COUNCIL:
1. TRANSFER $20,000.00 IN FUNDING PREVIOUSLY IDENTIFIED
AND APPROVED BY CITY COUNCIL FOR CANVASSING IN FY
2007-08 WITH ADDITIONAL FUNDING IN THE AMOUNT OF
$109,190.00 FROM THE GENERAL FUND RESERVE FOR THE
ANIMAL CONTROL OFFICER (City ASO) POSITION IN FY 2008-
09, AND STOP THE COUNTY OF LOS ANGELES FROM
CONDUCTING CANVASSING FOR FY 2007-08;
2. DIRECT STAFF TO CONDUCT A 24-MONTH PILOT PROGRAM
FOR A FULL-TIME ANIMAL CONTROL OFFICER TO BEGIN ON
THE DAY OF THE OFFICER’S HIRING;
3. CONSIDER THE REINSTITUTION OF MANDATORY CAT
LICENSING TO POTENTIALLY ACHIEVE ADDITIONAL LICENSE
REVENUES; AND
4. DIRECT STAFF TO RESEARCH ADDITIONAL FEES
ASSOCIATED WITH ANIMAL CARE AND CONTROL SERVICES
AND ENFORCEMENT.
Pursuant to the direction provided by the City Council, the Subcommittee
discussed the issues of mandatory cat licensing, additional fees
associated with animal care and control services and enforcement, and
other items of interest to the Subcommittee (including the spcaLA contract
presented to the City Council this evening).
DISCUSSION:
The Animal Control Subcommittee (Vice Mayor Silbiger and
Councilmember Armenta) has discussed with staff and members of the
Friends of Culver City Animals the possibility of contracting with the
spcaLA Hawthorne Animal Shelter as a potential alternative to the County
of Los Angeles Animal Care and Control Shelter in Carson. In presenting
this item to the City Council, staff is conveying the recommendation of the
Subcommittee. Additionally and in accordance with standard practice,
staff has included its best estimation of related fiscal impacts to assist the
City Council in making an informed decision.
City of Culver City, California
City Council Agenda Item Report
Current Process and Procedure
In FY 2007-08 (the most recent full fiscal year for which records are
available), the City of Culver City was billed $7,845.26 for “housing
services” (sheltering) portion of the LACDACC contract. The gross
sheltering cost was $8,272.76 for 116 dogs and cats and 189 other
animals impounded. LACDACC provides a credit to each monthly billing
for 1) impound fees collected; 2) board fees collected; 3) private
veterinarian fees collected; and 4) brought in fees collected. The credit
amount was $427.50 (leaving a net charge of $7,845.76 for sheltering).
Net sheltering costs for FY 2006-07 were $10,197.36 for 167 dogs and
cats and 201 other animals.
Veterinary Care Services: Under the terms of the current contract with
LACDACC, when the County Animal Control Officer (County ACO) picks
up an animal that needs emergency care, the County provides either
directly or through a contract with private veterinarians, the emergency
care needed to stabilize the animal. The veterinarian’s in-shelter hours
are 7:00 am to 3:30 pm, Monday through Friday. After hours, the County
ACO takes the animals to a private veterinarian, who has a purchase
order with LACDACC to administer emergency care for a flat charge of
$50 per animal. LACDACC attempts to collect $50 from the pet owner
who retrieves the animal at the shelter or passes through the charge of
$50 per animal to the City of Culver City. In FY 2007-08, six animals
received private veterinary care, all of which was paid for by the City, with
no amount recovered from the owner.
Potential for Future Changes in Contract Rates: The County Auditor-
Controller’s Office has reviewed LACDACC’s rates and determined with
LACDACC staff it may be necessary to increase rates for FY 2008-09 and
future fiscal years. In a letter dated May 5, 2008 (Attachment 1) the
County gave the City of Culver City an estimate of its rates at full cost
recovery and at 50% of full cost recovery for its services. In its letter,
LACDACC states, “For FY 2008-09, we need to advise you that the
increase in your contract amount will be based upon 50 percent or less of
the service unit rate increases needed to advance to the point of full cost
recovery.” Despite this statement, to date LACDACC has not yet
determined what increase, if any, will be applied in this fiscal year or future
fiscal years. LACDACC indicates it intends to meet with Culver City staff
to discuss any rate increases.
Impact on Current Costs if spcaLA Contract is Approved: While it is
possible the costs incurred from the County would change as a result of City of Culver City, California
City Council Agenda Item Report
the approval of the spcaLA contract, the amount of such change is difficult
to accurately estimate. Given the 24/7 nature of animal control services, if
the spcaLA contract were approved, certain sheltering, veterinary care,
and/or field services would still be needed by the City from the County on
a regular basis. Therefore, the contract with LACDACC cannot be
completely cancelled and related costs would still be incurred by the City.
Summary: The current contract with LACDACC provides both sheltering
and field services. The net costs for sheltering services for Fiscal Year
2007-2008 were $7,845.26. The LACDACC contract also includes
provision of emergency veterinary care for impounded animals at either no
additional cost (if provided by the County Veterinary staff during certain
hours) or at a cost not to exceed $50 per animal (if provided by a private
veterinarian under purchase order with LACDACC). The $50 per animal
fee may be collected from the animal’s owner at the time the animal is
released (which would mean no cost to the City when fees are collected
from the owner). These current terms may be subject to change in the
future.
Subcommittee Proposed Contract for Sheltering Services with spcaLA
In response to a request made by staff on behalf of the Subcommittee, on
July 9, 2008, spcaLA submitted a cover letter and sample contract
(Attachment 2) to provide sheltering services at its Hawthorne location. As
indicated in their letter, spcaLA is offering to provide sheltering services at
a cost of $2,452 per month to shelter Culver City impounded animals
($29,424 annually). Under the terms of the proposed contract, any fees
collected by the spcaLA shelter remain with the shelter.
Veterinary Care Services: The proposed contract (taken together with
the cover letter) provides unclear terms related to veterinary care. The
cover letter states: “…This fee includes all costs associated with housing
an animal for the legal holding period, including veterinary care…”
However, Section 2 of the contract provides: “…CITY agrees to insure
that all injured animals must receive emergency medical care as required
by applicable law before depositing said animal with SPCALA…” Given
these potentially conflicting provisions, the provision of veterinary care
may be an additional cost incurred by the City. This provision should be
clarified prior to execution of the contract.
Potential for Future Changes in Contract Rates: In an e-mail to staff,
senior management of spcaLA stated: “spcaLA will consider the option of
a 3 year agreement provided that and with the understanding and consent City of Culver City, California
City Council Agenda Item Report
of Culver City, that spcaLA reserves the right to adjust its contract fees as
necessary to perform it’s services as contracted during the 3 year contract
period.”
Impact on Current Costs if spcaLA Contract is Approved: Approval of
the spcaLA contract would increase costs by $29,424 per year. Those
costs may be offset, in part, by a change in costs incurred from the
LACDACC contract. The amount of any change is difficult to accurately
estimate at this time.
Summary: The proposed contract with spcaLA provides sheltering
services at a cost of $29,424 annually. Field services will need to be
provided from a source other than spcaLA (either through the City ASO or
the County ACO or a combination of both). The spcaLA contract provision
of emergency veterinary care services is unclear. If it is determined the
monthly fee includes veterinary care, then there will not be an additional
cost incurred by the City. If it is determined the monthly fee does not
include veterinary care, the City, by law, is required to provide veterinary
care. This result would lead to increased costs to the City. Also, because
the City does not currently have either an on-staff veterinarian or a
contract with local veterinarian(s) to provide the necessary services,
provision of those services would need to be undertaken. As with the
County, should the City Council adopt a fee to recover veterinary costs
incurred by the City, then to the extent veterinary fees are recovered from
pet owners upon retrieval of pets, then the potential costs to the City would
be reduced. These current terms may be subject to change in the future.
Anticipated Interface between County ACO and City ASO with spcaLA
Shelter in Hawthorne
Animals not Requiring Veterinary Care
Should the City Council determine to approve the contract for sheltering
services with spcaLA, then animals not requiring veterinary care picked up
by the City ASO or County ACO during spcaLA open shelter hours would
be brought to the spcaLA shelter. spcaLA staff indicated that a key to the
spcaLA shelter would be provided to the City’s ASO to admit healthy
animals after normal shelter open hours
Animals Requiring Veterinary Care
In accordance with state law, animals requiring veterinary care would need
to be provided with that care prior to the animal being presented to the City of Culver City, California
City Council Agenda Item Report
spcaLA shelter. If the spcaLA contract does not provide for emergency
veterinary services, then the City ASO would be responsible for obtaining
those services for the animal. The County ACO would also need to obtain
veterinary services for the animal. Both the County ACO and City ASO
could obtain emergency veterinary services at the Carson Shelter (either
directly from the County Veterinarian or through a purchase order with a
private veterinarian). Alternatively, if the City Council directs staff to
release an RFP for veterinary services, then both the County ACO and
City ASO could have the emergency veterinary services provided by local
veterinarians who chose to participate in the potential program (if any).
Transport to spcaLA shelter or LACDACC shelter?
The Subcommittee has expressed an interest in maximizing the utilization
of the spcaLA shelter and minimizing the use of the LACDACC shelter.
The City ASO could easily be directed to transport healthy animals to the
spcaLA shelter during open and after shelter hours.
While spcaLA would be willing to provide the County ACO with a key for
use during off hours, the County has expressed some concern over
entering the spcaLA shelter during off hours. Given this concern, during
hours when the spcaLA shelter is closed or when the animal is in need of
emergency veterinary care, then the County ACO would most likely
transport the animal to the LACDACC shelter. To transport the animal
from the LACDACC shelter to the spcaLA shelter, LACDACC’s Deputy
Director of Shelter Operations indicated in an e-mail: “CC would transfer
the animals from Carson to the S.P.C.A.”
The City Council may ultimately determine if, as a matter of policy, the City
ASO should be directed to retrieve animals from the LACDACC shelter
and transport them to the spcaLA shelter. Such a decision would impact
the amount of time the City ASO could devote to other duties such as
providing field services and canvassing.
Additional Fee Research
Pursuant to the City Council’s direction, staff conducted research related
to additional fees associated with animal care and control services and
enforcement.
A survey of nine cities with in-house animal control programs was
conducted. Part of this survey was to determine if there were additional
opportunities for Culver City to capture revenues to help offset the costs of City of Culver City, California
City Council Agenda Item Report
this program. The following areas were identified as potential revenue
sources: additional levels of license fees; pet relinquishment fees;
temporary shelter impounding and boarding fees; and administrative
citations.
Mandatory Cat Licensing
The City Council directed staff to consider re-institution of mandatory cat
licensing. When the City began its in-house licensing program on April 1,
2007, it included mandatory cat licensing. In August, 2007, the City
Council determined to return to voluntary cat licensing. During the
approximate five months time period when cat licensing was mandatory,
only a small handful of cat owners licensed their cats.
Re-institution of mandatory cat licensing at a per license fee of $20 would
result in an increase in gross revenues. However, there is a significant
resistance in the community to mandatory cat licensing (which may have
been a factor in the City Council’s August, 2007 decision to return to
voluntary cat licensing). To increase revenues significantly, there would
need to be a significant canvassing effort to identify cats in Culver City
subject to any new licensing requirement. The costs of such a canvassing
effort would offset (in whole or in part) any income generated by the new
licensing fee. The amount of income generated by mandatory cat
licensing is difficult to estimate at this time.
Modification of License Fees and Structure
As mentioned previously, Culver City has a base licensing rate of $40.
Currently, dog owners are required to alter and microchip their animals
(with certain limited exceptions to the alteration requirement) in order to
receive a license. There is a reduced license fee of $20 for altered
animals (all of which are required to be microchipped). Given the
alteration and microchipping requirement, the great majority of licenses
issued by Culver City are at the $20 fee level. Currently, Culver City has
approximately 1,740 valid dog licenses. In FY 2002-03, when LACDACC
canvassed the entire City for licenses, 3,736 licenses were issued for that
year (licensing operations were handled as part of the LACDACC contract
at that time).
One of the functions of the City ASO will be to canvass the City for dog
licenses. Because of the other duties this position will be responsible for
(including the potential duties associated with the spcaLA contract if
approved by the City Council), it is unknown how much time will be City of Culver City, California
City Council Agenda Item Report
available for canvassing and license enforcement. Also, findings from the
survey show that Culver City is the only City (LA County mandates
microchipping in unincorporated areas) that mandates microchipping for
dogs in order to receive a dog license. Because of this mandate it is
possible some owners may refuse to license their dog. If the City Council
were to change this decision and allow for optional microchipping, it may
impact the amount of licensing income received by the City, the actual
amount of which is difficult to estimate at this time.
The City Council may wish to consider the following options:
• Increase the base licensing fee from the existing $40
• Offer a discount for altered dogs (note, most dogs will qualify for
this rate given the current requirement to alter dogs in Culver
City)
• Offer an additional discount for microchipped dogs (offering this
discount would require the City Council to rescind mandatory
microchipping)
The Attached spreadsheet provides a preliminary estimate of revenues
that might be generated from such a change with a base licensing fee of
$60. The spreadsheet employs certain assumptions used in prior
analyses presented to the City Council.
Pet Relinquishment Fees
Many agencies, including LADACC, charge for pet relinquishment (live or
deceased) when a pet owner relinquishes their unwanted pet to
LACDACC. In practice, the drop-off of an unwanted pet is most often free
of charge. If a resident initiates a call for the County’s ACO to come to
their home to pick up their relinquished pet(s), a fee of $5.89 per deceased
animal is charged with the charge of $10 for relinquishment of a live
animal. In fiscal year 2007/2008, LACDACC received five calls from
Culver City residents to provide relinquishment services at their place of
residence. Following are proposed amounts that fall approximately in the
middle of the surveyed cities:
$25.00 - Pick-up of animal up to 100 lbs.
$50.00 - Pick-up of animal over 100 lbs.
City of Culver City, California
City Council Agenda Item Report
It should be noted, that the current pet relinquishment fees (if any)
collected by LACDACC are credited against the City’s gross sheltering
costs.
If the City Council were to determine to institute an alternate City fee for
pet relinquishment applicable to animals taken to the spcaLA Shelter (in
the event the City Council approves such a contract), then the City would
need to consult with spcaLA to determine how to administer that fee and
what, if any, split of that fee would be made between the City and spcaLA.
With these variables, it is difficult to estimate the revenues from this
source.
Temporary Shelter Impounding and Boarding Fees
The amounts for impounding and boarding at the City’s temporary shelter
location are proposed to be kept in line with what is currently being
charged by LACDACC. These fees would be recouped directly by the City
if the animal is held in the City’s temporary shelter (in the case the owner
of the animal can ultimately be identified and contacted):
|1010|st
offense: $10.00 + $7.50/day |1010|nd
offense: $20.00 + $7.50/day |1010|rd
offense: $30.00 + $7.50/day
Implementation of this fee is contingent upon the implementation of a
temporary shelter by the City. The City Council is requested to consider
this issue on a staff report contained on this evening’s agenda. With these
variables, it is difficult to estimate the revenues from this source.
Administrative Citations
The subcommittee raised the question as to whether the ASO could use
the administrative citation process (currently available in the Enforcement
Services Division) as an enforcement tool for violations of animal related
provisions in the Culver City Municipal Code (CCMC). Under current
provisions of the administrative citation process as set forth in the CCMC,
the first violation is a $100.00 fine, the second a $200.00 fine, and the third
and subsequent violations are a $500.00 fine (second and more are
applicable within one year).
A final determination as to the applicability of the Administrative Citation
Process for Animal Services will require some additional research and
analysis to reconcile the City’s Animal Control Ordinance and the County City of Culver City, California
City Council Agenda Item Report
Animal Control Ordinance, which the City has adopted by reference.
Additionally, there will also need to be some consultation with the County
to clarify enforcement procedures for both the City and the County.
Should the City Council so direct, staff will proceed with this process and
return to the City Council with any necessary items.
If the Administrative Citation Process can be applied to the enforcement of
the City’s Animal Control Ordinance, there may be gross income
generated, the amount of which is difficult to estimate at this time. Any
gross income would be offset by the potential for increased costs of
enforcement and processing of the Administrative Citations through the
hearing process provided for in the CCMC.
Additionally, with the addition of the City’s ASO to the City’s animal care
and control program, an issue arises as to the enforcement of the City’s
Animal Control Ordinance. In the past, when animal control services were
provided solely through the contract with LACDACC, it was clear that the
County ACO would provide field services and the County, through the
County’s District Attorney’s Office, would handle prosecution of violations
of Title 10 (which the City has incorporated into Chapter 9.01 of the
CCMC). Application of the administrative citation process to animal
services would not be administered by the County’s District Attorney.
Rather, it would impact costs of administration of the Administrative
Citation process.
In addition to impact on costs of the administration of the Administrative
Citation process, with the introduction of the City’s ASO into the
enforcement process, the issue of the differences between enforcement
agencies (i.e. the County and the City) needs to be further explored.
There may be other costs related to the prosecution of the animal control
provisions of the CCMC in the case the County asserts the City Attorney’s
Office is the office with jurisdiction to prosecute such items. The amount,
if any, of costs related to City Attorney’s Office prosecution is difficult to
estimate at this time because of the need to consult with LACDACC and
the County District Attorney’s Office. However, the City Attorney’s Office
has concerns these impacts could turn out to be significant, which may
necessitate an increase in resources to address the added workload.
Other
The issuance of multi-year licenses was analyzed to see if they would be a
practical mechanism for bringing in additional revenue. It was determined
that current and future workload issues would make this function very City of Culver City, California
City Council Agenda Item Report
difficult to implement and track. Additionally, generally speaking, persons
who license their pets without the need for collection activities are very
likely to follow the law in subsequent years. Therefore, it is opined multi-
year licenses would not appreciably impact revenues.
Conclusion
The Subcommittee felt this issue was of significant import to bring the item
to the full City Council at this time. As is staff’s routine practice, staff has
attempted to provide the City Council with fiscal and operational
information related to the action recommended by the Subcommittee.
As the City Council will note, there are a significant number of variables
that, with particular likelihood, will have a fiscal or operational impact on
this one piece of a multi-faceted animal control program.
The Subcommittee has taken an active role in working directly with the
spcaLA, local veterinarians, and other stakeholders and has not involved
staff in a number of these interactions. Therefore, the information
provided herein by staff may not reflect information shared during
meetings between parties and the Subcommittee.
Staff would have preferred to have participated in all meetings so that the
Subcommittee and the full City Council would have the benefit of staff’s
input. Unfortunately, this lack of participation and the desire of the
Subcommittee to bring this item to the City Council at this time has
negatively impacted staff’s ability to provide the City Council with a more
complete picture. Also, the piece by piece approach applied to this
important and complex new program has also negatively impacted staff’s
ability to provide a complete and thorough analysis of the complete
program.
This lack of information will, most likely, result in unanticipated costs
which, in turn, will impact the overall financial standing of the City at the
conclusion of fiscal year 2008/2009. Given the highly volatile nature of the
current economic environment, the high probability of additional state take-
aways from local governments, and the existing projections of an
operational deficit for fiscal years 2008/2009 and 2009/2010, staff has
significant concerns related to the incorporation of a new operational
program into the City’s workplan that was not fully evaluated as part of the
budget process.
City of Culver City, California
City Council Agenda Item Report
FISCAL ANALYSIS:
The spcaLA has proposed a three year contract. Costs for the first year
are $29,424 (or a minimum of $86,272 over the three year proposed
contract term – subject to changes in costs as stated in the contract).
Based upon this multi-year contract and existing City Charter and City
Council Policy provisions, staff has determined the approval of the spcaLA
contract would require a budget amendment (for which the City Charter
requires a 4/5ths vote).
As noted in this report, there are also other potential fiscal impacts related
to the implementation of the spcaLA contract. The amount of many of the
potential impacts is difficult to estimate at this time.
ATTACHMENTS:
1. County of Los Angeles Department of Animal Care and Control
Annual Service Rate Letter, May 5, 2008
2. spcaLA Cover Letter and Sample Contract, July 8, 2008.
MOTION:
That the City Council:
1A. Determine if it wishes to approve a contract with spcaLA for
animal sheltering services (the Subcommittee recommends approval)
at a rate of $2,452/month for a total of $________ for the remainder of
FY 2008-09 (approval of the contract would require a 4/5ths vote for
the associated budget amendment); or,
1B. Determine if it wishes to decline a contract with spcaLA for animal
sheltering services;
and
2A. Direct staff to proceed with an RFP to solicit proposals for
veterinary care services and return to the City Council when responses
to the RFP are received; or
2B. Determine that as a matter of policy animals who are in need of
emergency veterinary care shall be transported to the LACDACC City of Culver City, California
City Council Agenda Item Report
shelter so that such care can be provided under the terms of the City’s
contract with LACDACC;
and
3A. (If the City Council determines to approve the contract with
spcaLA) Determine as a matter of policy that animals impounded by
the City ASO should be transported between the LACDACC shelter
and the spcaLA shelter; or
3B. (If the City Council determines to approve the contract with
spcaLA) Determine as a matter of policy that animals transported to
the LACDACC shelter shall remain at the LACDACC shelter and
animals transported to the spcaLA shelter remain at the spcaLA
shelter.
and
4A. Determine to implement any new fees related to animal control;
OR
4. Determine to consider this entire subject as part of the Fiscal Year
2009/2010 budget process.
MEETING DATE: November 10, 2008
AGENDA ITEM: Consideration of the Animal Control Subcommittee's
Recommendation to Approve a Contract with SpcaLA
for Animal Sheltering Services and Discussion and
Potential Implementation of Additional Related Fees.
ATTACHMENTS
Pages
1. LACDACC Annual Service Rates Letter 1-2
2. spcaLA Cover Letter and Agreement 3-8
3. Spreadsheet-License Fees 9Marcia Mayeda
Director
County of Los Angeles
Department of Animal Care and Control
Administrative Office RPC'/:
5898 Cherry Avenue
Long Beach, California 90805
(562) 728-4610 Fax (562) 422-3478
http://animalcare.facounty.gov
COUNTY Or
2008 HA
- -1
Pttlacfr,
AND CONTROL
CITY OFFICE
CITY
OF CULVER CITY
May 5, 2008
Mr. Jerry Fulwood
Culver City, City Manager
9770 Culver Boulevard
Culver City, CA 90232-0507
Dear Mr. Jerry Fulwood:
ANNUAL SERVICE RATES
Pursuant to our contract with Culver City, the field services, housing,
canvassing and license processing rates are adjusted annually once the Los
Angeles County Auditor-Controller has completed its review of our
department's costs. Rates are based on the current cost of labor and
materials to provide these services. During the review to determine rates for
Fiscal Year (FY) 2008-09, the Auditor-Controller, in collaboration with our
department's staff, identified that our department had been using understated
cost data which caused our rates to be calculated at less than 65 percent of
our billable costs for FY2006-07 and 2007-08.
Therefore, the Auditor-Controller's FY2008-09 annual review included
accurate data and yielded significant increases to our rates. In an effort to
minimize the impact to Culver City, we have decided not to pass on the full
cost of service to your city at this time. In consideration of the financial
challenges faced by local governments, we are looking at multi-year options
to phase in the increases. For FY2008-09, we need to advise you that the
increase in your contract amount will be based upon 50 percent or less of the
service unit rate increases needed to advance to the point of full cost
recovery.
In order to discuss the data discrepancies in past service unit rates, the
increases necessary to correct these discrepancies, and develop the phased
increase plan with all of our contract city customers, we will be working with
both the Contract Cities Association and the regional Councils of
Governments to set meetings as soon as possible. Based upon the input we
receive at the city meetings, we will make a final decision about-the increase
for FY2008-09 and advise all city customers.
Shelter Locations
Downey Shelter
11258 S. Garfield Ave.
Downey, CA 90242
(562) 940-6898
Carson Shelter
216W. Victoria St.
Gardena, CA 90248
(310) 523-9566
Baldwin Park Shelter
4275 N. Elton St.
Baldwin Park. CA 91706
(626) 962-3577
Lancaster Shelter
5210W. Avenue
Lancaster, CA 93536
(661) 940-4191
Castalc Shelter
31044 N. Charlie Cyn,
Road
Castaic, CA 91384
(661) 257-3191
Agoura Shelter
29525 Agoura Rd.
Agoura, CA 91301
(818) 991-0071
Major Case Unit
11258 S. Garfield Ave_
Downey, CA 20242
(562) 658-2000
Annual Service Rates
"To Enrich Lives Through Effective And Caring Service"Contract Cities
May 5, 2008
Page 2
The table below provides an estimate of the rates at full cost recovery and at 50 percent
of full cost recovery.
Service Provided FY2007-08
Rates
Full Cost
Recovery
50% of increase
to Full Cost Recovery
Daily Housing Costs Dog/Cat $ 10.47 $ 23.65 $ 17.06
Daily Housing Other Animals $ 5.78 $ 10.31 $ 8.05
Daily Special Care All Animals $ 16.30 $ 28.38 $ 22.34
Stray Dead Animal Disposal $ 5.89 $ 14.48 $ 10.19
ACO Field Services Hourly Rate $ 59.42 $ 72.32 $ 65.87
Canvassing Hourly Rates $ 50.13 $ 55.47 $ 52.80
The table below provides an estimate of the increased costs to Culver City at full cost
recovery and at 50 percent of full cost recovery.
FY2008-09 Estimate
with Full Cost Recovery
FY2008-09 Estimate
with 50% increase to Full Cost Recovery
$ 80,282 $ 68,500
We think it is important for you to know that the Los Angeles County per capita animal
care cost is significantly lower than costs in other jurisdictions. The Humane Society of
the United States recommends municipalities budget anywhere from $5 to $8 per capita
for their animal control budget. Further studies have shown that other agencies in
Southern California spend between $5 and $11 per capita. Therefore, even with the full
cost recovery increases, we estimate the current gross per capita cost to all of our cities
for services provided by our department to be less than $2.80.
If you have any further questions regarding the above information, please do not
hesitate to contact Stacy Rose Mungo at (562) 256-1376. We truly look forward to
continuing to provide services to the City of Culver City.
Sincerely,
abfitiWc66—
MARCIA MAYEDA
Director
MM:SRM:mtm
Annual Service RatesSPCillia
Friends for life
F.:',-;;;;:;k•a
July 8, 2008
Ms. Shelly Wolfberg
City of Culver City
P.O. Box 507
Culver City, CA 90232-0507
=
Sincerely,
Madeline Bernstein, President
MB:de
Congratulations to your city on hiring a full time Animal Control Officer. We know this action wil
improve the quality of service for the residents of your city. In our experience, the dedication of a
full time person to handle animal control issues in a city increases the actual number of animals
handled per year significantly and a dramatic increase in constituent satisfaction.
In response to your e-mail request of June 26th we submit the following. The Jefferson facility will
soon be opening as a Specialty Spay/Neuter Center, so our proposal is for sheltering services at the
Yukon Avenue facility in Hawthorne. We are a full service sheltering facility. We do handle
animals other than cats and dogs. The public hours are Wed-Fri 11-6; Sat-Sun 10-5. Owners of
tagged or micro chipped animals are notified by phone and by mail. Tagged or micro chipped
animals are held for 14 days before they are available to the general public for adoption. Untagged
animals are held for 6 days before they are available for adoption. Using your actual numbers from
FY06/07 (167 cats/dogs; 201 other; 156 dead) we propose a fixed fee contract of $29,424.00 billed
monthly at $2,452.00 to shelter Culver City impounded animals. This fee includes all costs
associated with housing an animal for the legal holding period, including veterinary care.
As you may be aware, we shelter animals for a significant number of days beyond the legal holding
period, if appropriate. The average shelter stay for an animal at our Yukon facility is 24.5 days.
However, we have sheltered animals as long as a year before a suitable home was found.
Sheltering activity beyond the legal holding period is done at our expense. Therefore, our actual
cost to house an animal is much higher than the estimate we used to prepare this quote.
Additionally, we would be happy to work with your city to provide low cost vaccination and
microchip clinics and animal training classes.
Enclosed is a sample of our basic Sheltering Contract for your information. Please review this
document and contact us if you wish to continue this negotiation.
We support your efforts to ensure more animals find homes by exploring options other than those
the County system is able to provide.
Santa Monica Place Pet Adoption Center • Santa Mumcl Placc ,Thnta Monica, CA 90481 • I': 31 0-5`,H7-:',502Agreement No.
CONTRACT FOR ANIMAL SHELTERING SERVICES
BETWEEN
THE CITY OF AND
SPCALA
This AGREEMENT is entered into on this day of , by and between
the CITY OF , a city and municipal corporation,
("CITY") and SPCALA, a California Corporation ("CONTRACTOR").
1. Consideration.
A. As partial consideration, CONTRACTOR agrees to perform the work listed in the SCOPE
OF SERVICES, below;
B. As additional consideration, CONTRACTOR and CITY agree to abide by the terms and
conditions contained in this Agreement.
C. As additional consideration, CITY agrees to pay CONTRACTOR a monthly sum equal
to for CONTRACTOR'S services. Unless otherwise specified by
written amendment to this Agreement, CITY will pay this sum within fourteen (14) days
after receiving an invoice.
2. SCOPE OF SERVICES. CONTRACTOR will serve as the Director of Animal Sheltering for
CITY in accordance with applicable law. To fulfill this responsibility CONTRACTOR will furnish
an animal shelter located at 12910 Yukon Avenue in the City of Hawthorne and maintain that
animal shelter during the term of this Agreement. CITY agrees to insure that all injured animals
must receive emergency medical care as required by applicable law before depositing said animal
with SPCALA. CONTRACTOR agrees not to provide animals for scientific research.
3. TERM. The term of this Agreement will be from to Unless otherwise determined by written amendment between the parties, this Agreement will
terminate as stated in Section 8.
4. TIME FOR PERFORMANCE. CONTRACTOR will not perform any work under this
Agreement until CONTRACTOR furnishes proof of insurance as required under Section 13 of this
Agreement.
5. TAXPAYER IDENTIFICATION NUMBER. CONTRACTOR will provide CITY with a
taxpayer identification number.
6. PERMITS AND LICENSES. CONTRACTOR, at its sole expense, will obtain and maintain
during the term of this Agreement, all necessary permits, licenses, and certificates that may be
required in connection with the performance of services under this Agreement.
7. PROJECT COORDINATION AND SUPERVISION.
A. will be assigned as Project Manager and will be responsible for
coordination with CITY'S Project Manager.
Page 1 of 5B. will be assigned as CITY'S Project Manager and will be personally in
charge of and personally supervise or perform the technical execution of the Project on a
day-to-day basis on behalf of CITY and will maintain direct communication with
CONTRACTOR'S Project Manager.
8. TERMINATION.
A. Except as otherwise provided, either party may terminate this Agreement at any
time with or without cause upon (30) days notice. Notice of termination will be in
writing.
B. Should the Agreement be terminated pursuant to this section, CITY may procure
on its own terms services similar to those terminated.
C. By executing this document, CONTRACTOR and CITY each waive any and all
claims for damages that might otherwise arise from termination under this
section.
9. INDEMNIFICATION.
A. CONTRACTOR indemnifies, will defend (at CITY'S request and with counsel
satisfactory to CITY), and holds CITY harmless from and against any claim,
action, damages, costs (including without limitation, attorney's fees), injuries, or
liability, arising out of this Agreement, or its performance. Should CITY be
named in any suit, or should any claim be against it by suit or otherwise, whether
the same be groundless or not, arising out of this Agreement, or it's performance,
CONTRACTOR will defend CITY (with counsel reasonably satisfactory to
CITY) and will indemnify City for any judgment rendered against it or any sums
paid out in settlement or otherwise.
B. For purposes of this section "CITY" includes CITY'S officers, officials,
employees, agents, representatives, and certified volunteers.
C. CONTRACTOR expressly agrees that this release, waiver, and indemnity
Agreement is intended to be as broad and inclusive as is permitted by the law of
the State of California and that if any portion is held invalid, it is agreed that the
balance will, notwithstanding, continue in full legal force and effect.
D. It is expressly understood and agreed that the foregoing provisions will survive
termination of this Agreement.
E. The requirement as to the types and limits of insurance coverage to be maintained
by CONTRACTOR as required by Section 13, and any approval of said
insurance by CITY, are not intended to and will not in any manner limit or
qualify the liabilities and obligations otherwise assumed by CONTRACTOR
pursuant to this Agreement, including, without limitation, to the provisions
concerning indemnification.
10. ASSIGNABILITY. This Agreement is for CONTRACTOR'S unique services.
CONTRACTOR'S attempts to assign the benefits or burdens of this Agreement without CITY'S
written approval are prohibited and will be null and void.
11. INDEPENDENT CONTRACTOR CITY and CONTRACTOR agree that
CONTRACTOR will act as an independent contractor and will have control of all work and the
manner in which it is performed. CONTRACTOR will be free to contract for similar service to be
performed for other employers while under contract with CITY. CONTRACTOR is not an agent or
Page 2 of 5employee of CITY and is not entitled to participate in any pension plan, insurance, bonus or similar
benefits CITY provides for its employees. Any provision in this Agreement that may appear to give
CITY the right to direct CONTRACTOR as to the details of doing the work or to exercise a
measure of control over the work means that CONTRACTOR will follow the direction of the
CITY as to end results of the work only.
12. RECORDS RETENTION. CONTRACTOR will maintain full and accurate records with
respect to all services and matters covered under this Agreement. CONTACTOR will retain such
financial and program service records for at least three (3) years after termination or final payment
under this Agreement.
13. INSURANCE.
A. Before commencing performance under this Agreement, and at all other times
this Agreement is effective, CONTRACTOR will procure and maintain the
following types of insurance with coverage limits complying, at a minimum, with
the limits set forth below.
Type of Insurance Limits (combined single)
Commercial general liability: $1,000,000
Business automobile liability S1,000,000
Workers compensation Statutory limits
B. Commercial general liability insurance will meet or exceed the requirements of
ISO-CGL Form No. CG 00 01 10 01. The amount of insurance set forth above
will be a combined single limit per occurrence for bodily injury, personal injury,
and property damage for the policy coverage. Liability policies will be endorsed
to name CITY, its officials, and employees as "additional insured's" under said
insurance coverage and to state that such insurance will be deemed "primary"
such that any other insurance that may be carried by CITY will be excess thereto.
Such insurance will be on an "occurrence", not a "claims made," basis and will
not be cancelable except upon thirty (30) days prior written notice to CITY.
C. Automobile coverage will be written on ISO Business Auto Coverage Form CA
00 01 07 97, or similar form for CONTRACTOR owned Autos.
D. CONTRACTOR will furnish to CITY duly authenticated Certificates of
Insurance and Endorsements evidencing maintenance of the insurance required
under this Agreement and such other evidence of insurance or copies of policies
as maybe reasonably required by CITY from time to time. Insurance must be
placed with insurers with a current A.M. Best Company rating of "A:VII."
E. Should CONTRACTOR, for any reason fail to obtain and maintain the insurance
required by this Agreement, CITY may obtain such coverage at
CONTRACTOR'S expense and deduct the cost of such insurance from payments
due to CONTRACTOR under this Agreement or terminate pursuant to section 8.
14. NOTICES. All communications to either party by the other party will be deemed made
when received by such party at its respective name and address as follows:
CONTRACTOR
David Havard
spcaLA
CITY
Page 3 of 55026 West Jefferson Blvd.
Los Angeles, CA 90016
Any such written communications by mail will be conclusively deemed to have been received by
the addressee at the time of actual delivery. Changes may be made in the names or addresses of
persons to whom notices are to be given by giving notices in the manner prescribed in this
paragraph.
15. INTERPRETATION. This Agreement was drafted in, and will be construed in
accordance with the laws of the State of California, and exclusive venue for any involving this
Agreement will be in Los Angeles County.
16. ENTIRE AGREEMENT. This Agreement sets forth the entire understanding of the
parties. There are no other understandings, terms or other Agreements expressed or implied, oral or
written. This Agreement will bind and inure to the benefit of the parties to this Agreement and any
subsequent successors and assigns.
17. EFFECT OF CONFLICT. In the event of any conflict, inconsistency, or incongruity
between any provision of this Agreement, and any other document or agreement, whether oral or
written, the provisions of this Agreement will govern and control.
18. RULES OF CONSTRUCTION. Each Party had the opportunity to independently
review this Agreement with legal counsel. Accordingly, this Agreement will be construed simply,
as a whole, and in accordance with its fair meaning; it will not be interpreted strictly for or against
either party.
19. SEVERABILITY. If any portion of this Agreement is declared by a court of competent
jurisdiction to be invalid or unenforceable, then such portion will be deemed modified to the extent
necessary in the opinion of the court to render such portion enforceable and, as so modified, such
portion and the balance of this Agreement will continue in full force and effect.
20. AUTHORITY/MODIFICATION. The parties represent and warrant that all necessary
action has been taken by the parties to authorize the undersigned to execute this Agreement and to
engage in the actions described herein. This Agreement may be modified by written amendment
executed by both parties. CITY'S city manager, or designee, may execute ay such amendment on
behalf of CITY.
21. COVENANTS AND CONDITIONS. The parties agree that all of the provisions hereof
will be construed as both covenants and conditions, the same as if the words importing such
covenants and conditions had been used in each separate paragraph.
22. CAPTIONS. The captions of the paragraphs of this Agreement are for convenience of
reference only and not affect the interpretation of this Agreement.
23. FORCE MAJEURE. Should performance of this Agreement be prevented due to fire,
flood, explosion, war, embargo, and government action, civil or military authority, the natural
elements, or other similar causes beyond the parties' control, then the Agreement will immediately
terminate without obligation of either party to the other.
24. TIME IS OF ESSENCE. Time is of the essence for each and every provision of this
Agreement.
25. COUNTERPARTS. This Agreement may be executed in any number or counterparts,
each of which will be an original, but all of which together will constitute one instrument executed
on the same date.
Page 4 of 5IN WITNESS WHEREOF the parties hereto have executed this contract the day and year first
hereinabove written.
CITY OF SPCALA
a California Corporation
Madeline Bernstein,
City Manager President
David Havard
Vice President
ATTEST:
City Clerk
Page 5 of 5Proposed License Fees
there would be an extremely low amount)
very low percentage)
Base License Fee
Altered/Microchipped
Altered/Non-Microchipped
Delinquency (in addition to License Fee)
$ 60.00 (Would include Unaltered/Non-Microchipped dogs, of which
$ 20.00
$ 40.00 (Includes Unaltered/Microchipped dogs, of which there is a
$ 25.00
ASSUMPTIONS: ASSUMPTIONS: ASSUMPTIONS:
Approx. Licensed Dogs in 2007-08: 1,740 Est. Licensed Dogs w/below assumption: 2,610 Est. Licensed Dogs w/below assumption: 3,480
No Additional Canvassing Addl. Canvassing (assumes +50% based on previous history) Addl. Canvassing (assumes 100% increase)
AlteredtMicrochipped $ 20.00 Standard Renewals $ 20.00 Standard Renewals $ 20.00
% Gross Licenses % Licenses % Licenses
Collection Revenue Issued Collection Gross Revenue Issued Collection Gross Revenue Issued
Best Case 100% $34,800 1,740 Best Case 100% $52,200 2,610 Best Case 100% $69,600 3,480
90% $31,320 1,566 90% $46,980 2,349 90% $62,640 3,132
80% $27,840 1,392 80% $41,760 2,088 80% $55,680 2,784
70% $24,360 1,218 70% $36,540 1,827 70% $48,720 2,436
60% $20,880 1,044 60% $31,320 1,566 60% $41,760 2,088
ASSUMPTIONS: ASSUMPTIONS: ASSUMPTIONS:
Approx. Licensed Dogs in 2007-08: 1,740 Est. Licensed Dogs w/below assumption: 2,610 Est. Licensed Dogs w/below assumption: 3,480
No Additional Canvassing Addl. Canvassing (assumes +50% based on previous history) Addl. Canvassing (assumes 100% increase)
Altered/Microchipped $ 20.00 Altered/Microchipped (90%): $ 20.00 Altered/Microchipped (90%): $ 20.00
Altered/Non-Microchippecl (10%): $ 40.00 Altered/Non-Microchipped (10%): $ 40.00
% Gross Licenses % Licenses % Licenses
Collection Revenue Issued Collection Gross Revenue Issued Collection Gross Revenue Issued
Best Case 100% $34,800 1,740 Best Case 100% $57,420 2,610 Best Case 100% $76,560 3,480
90% $31,320 1,566 90% $51,678 2,349 90% $68,904 3,132
80% $27,840 1,392 80% $45,936 2,088 80% $61,248 2,784
70% $24,360 1,218 70% $40,194 1,827 70% $53,592 2,436
60% $20,880 1,044 60% $34,452 1,566 60% $45,936 2,088
ASSUMPTIONS: ASSUMPTIONS: ASSUMPTIONS:
Approx. Licensed Dogs In 2007-08: 1,740 Est. Licensed Dogs w/below assumption: 2,610 Est. Licensed Dogs w/below assumption: 3,480
No Additional Canvassing Addl. Canvassing (assumes +50% based on previous history) Addl. Canvassing (assumes 100% increase)
Altered/Microchipped $ 20.00 Altered/Microchipped (90%): $ 20.00 Altered/Microchipped (90%): $ 20.00
Altered/Non-Microchipped (10%): $ 40.00 Altered/Non-Microchipped (10%): $ 40.00
Delinquency Rate (5%): $ 25.00 Delinquency Rate (5%): $ 25.00
% Gross Licenses
%
Licenses % Licenses
Collection Revenue Issued Collection Gross Revenue Issued Collection Gross Revenue Issued
Best Case 100% $34,800 1,740 Best Case 100% $60,683 2,610 Best Case 100% $80,910 3,480
90% $31,320 1,566 90% $54,614 2,349 90% $72,819 3,132
80% $27,840 1,392 80% $48,546 2,088 80% $64,728 2,784
70% $24,360 1,218 70% $42,478 1,827 70% $56,637 2,436
60% $20,880 1,044 60% $36,410 1,566 60% $48,546 2,088
November 5, 2008