The URL can be used to link to this page

Home My WebLink About08.A- Community Development DOC ID: 1550 B CITY OF SAN BERNARDINO—REQUEST FOR COUNCIL ACTION ReportlInformation From: Margo Wheeler M/CC Meeting Date: 03/19/2012 Prepared by: Shirley Robinson, (909)384- 5057 Dept: Community Development Ward(s): All Subject: Management Study of the Code Enforcement Division by Matrix Consulting Group (At Meeting of February 6, 2012, Item Continued to March 19, 2012.) Financial Impact: None. Motion: Authorize the Director of Community Development to implement the recommendations of the Matrix Consulting Group Management Study of the Code Enforcement Division. Synopsis of Previous Council Action: None. Background: The Matrix Consulting Group was retained by the City of San Bernardino to conduct a management study of the Code Enforcement Division. The study involved a comprehensive organization and management analysis of the Division's existing operations, service levels, management, and staffing levels. The objective of the assessment was to identify opportunities for improvement in the efficiency, effectiveness, and service delivery of the Division as well as opportunities for enhancing the quality of its product and service. As part of the study, Matrix interviewed customers including several neighborhood associations, the Chamber of Commerce, local businesses,Police,Fire and City Attorney departments. ANALYSIS Updated: 3/13/2012 by Linda Sutherland B I 1550 The Code Enforcement Division employs a number of best practices and there are a number of strengths in the Division ranging from recently developed goals, objectives, and performance measures, monthly reports for the Director, the staff relocating to City Hall, the appropriate number of management layers or span of control, the extent of administrative support is proper, the correct utilization of an array of municipal codes to address neighborhood preservation, and use of laptop computer and portable printers to facilitate the field work. There are also a number of areas where improvements can be made and the consulting group identified these areas through 139 recommendations. Implementation of each category will be followed by observation to gauge if the recommendation needs to be altered based on effectiveness,workload restraints, economic issues facing the City,and citizen feedback. The general categories of recommendations are as follows: 1. Organization 2. Management Systems 3. Codes/Ordinances 4. Training and Supervision i 5. Customer Service 6. Information Technology 7. Operations The Code Enforcement management reviewed the draft documents, are familiar with the findings and supervisory staff have met to prioritize recommendations and expedite implementation. �+ RECOMMENDATION V Updated:3/13/2012 by Linda Sutherland B 1550 Authorize the Director of Community Development to implement the recommendations of the CMatrix Consulting Group Management Study of the Code Enforcement Division. Supportins Documents: 8B - San Bernardino Cade Enforcement Division Management Study 1-29-12 (PDF) II O Updated:3/13/2012 by Linda Sutherland B Packet Pg. 658 d v 0 U d L O T 'O N C d E d rn d c d 0 Management Study of the Code Enforcement Division 0 CITY OF SAN BERNARDINO, CALIFORNIA N df N T 'O 3 VJ C d E d rn d c d c 0 Z 0 c d E d d 0 c w d v 0 U O C D N C matrix consulting group d January 2012 LE u d Q Packet Pg. 659 UsA.a d 0 TABLE OF CONTENTS v r 0 Chapter# Chapter Title Page # v N 1. Introduction And Executive Summary 1 E d 2. Profile 26 A 3. Comparative Survey 53 0 w N 4. Customer Feedback 66 0 0 5. Diagnostic Appraisal 73 v 6. Analysis Of The Plan Of Organization 80 C6 N 7. Analysis Of Management Systems 91 8. Analysis Of Codes And Ordinances 121 m E 9. Analysis Of Training And Certification 132 c m 10. Analysis Of Customer Service 137 0 .y 11. Analysis Of Information Technology 153 0 c m 12. Analysis Of Code Enforcement Operations 163 E U O C W d 0 O U 0 c D N F 0 m C R N m ro C d E L U N Q Packet Pg. 660 v D O U INDEX OF EXHIBITS w 0 a N C d E d rn Page c m Exhibit# Exhibit Title Number 0 N 1 Fiscal Year 2011-12 Budgeted Expenditures and Revenues 27 2 Existing Plan of Organization of the Code Enforcement 31 c Division v 3 2010 Case Status by Type of Case 40 N 4 Code Enforcement Workload Assignments in 2010 43 N T 5 Number of Violations By Case Type 46 y 6 Calendar Days Required for the First Inspection and For Case 47 m Closure E m m 7 Comparison of Economic Data: San Bernardino Versus Other 52 Cities in San Bernardino and Riverside Counties c 0 M 8 Sample Performance Measures 98 2 c c 9 Possible Monthly Performance Report 102 E E U 10 Recommended Management Reports For the Code 105 w Enforcement Division w d v 11 Outline for a Procedures Manual 112 ° U O c 12 Examples of Properties with Multiple Violations in 2010 183 m c d m c R N m ao C d E z U m Pa6k4#g.-661, i CITY OF SAN BERNARDINO, CALIFORNIA Management Study of the Code Enforcement Division m 1 . INTRODUCTION AND EXECUTIVE SUMMARY d L This initial chapter of the report introduces the approaches utilized in this study T "O and summarizes key findings, conclusions and recommendations to be found in this y c report. E d rn 1. INTRODUCTION TO THE REPORT q M The Matrix Consulting Group was retained by the City of San Bernardino to 0 conduct a management study of the Code Enforcement Division. The study involved a c comprehensive organization and management analysis of the Division's existing 2 d operations, service levels, management, and staffing levels. The analysis was fact- based. The aspects of the analysis of the Division are presented below. N T Evaluate the organizational structure of the Division, including the division of labor and managerial / supervisory spans of control. n T a • Analyze the staffing and service levels including, but not limited to, staff d assignments, workload, training, and the cost-effectiveness of service levels and service delivery. c • Analyze the processes used by the Division to deliver services to its customers 2 including opportunities to streamline and enhance the management of these 0 processes. d The approach of the Matrix Consulting Group in meeting this scope included the 0 0 following: w` m v Develop an in-depth understanding of the key issues impacting the Division; 0 0 c Develop a profile of the Division including the current plan of organization, the v structure and functions of the Division, budgets, workload data, management c systems, etc.; m c m • Compare the Division's program and practices to 'best management practices' N and other cities; m Interview a sample of the customers of the services provided by the Division to E obtain their feedback regarding the adequacy of these services; and m a Matrix Consulting Group Pagel Packet Pg. 662 CITY OF SAN BERNARDINO, CALIFORNIA Management Study of the Code Enforcement Division w 0 0 Evaluate the staffing, organization structure, and service levels in the Division. t This included the current service delivery model, the current service levels, work practices, work planning and scheduling systems, productivity and staffing levels, 0 and the plan of organization. U) The objective of this assessment was to identify opportunities for improvement in the d E v efficiency, effectiveness, and service delivery of the Division and opportunities for A enhancing the quality of its product and services. 0 0 2. THE CODE ENFORCEMENT DIVISION EMPLOYS A NUMBER OF BEST PRACTICES. 0 0 An organizational and management analysis by its nature focuses on d rr opportunities for improvement. However, there are a number of strengths in the Division. N o Examples of these strengths are portrayed below. N a Goals, objectives, and performance measures have recently been developed for 8 N the Division. E E • The Division recently published its first monthly report for the Departmental rn Director. R The Code Enforcement Division is organizationally cc-located with the Planning c Division and the Building and Safety Division as part of the Community .T Development Department. o c d • The number of management layers (not the spans of control) for the Division is E appropriate. `o w c • The extent of administrative support for the Code Enforcement Division is d appropriate. o U O The Code Enforcement Division utilizes a comprehensive array of municipal =_ "v codes to address neighborhood preservation. d • The Cade Enforcement Division uses a commercial-off-the-shelf automated 00 c information system — GOEnforce. y The Division uses laptop computers and portable printers to facilitate the work of its staff in the field d E L U A Q Matrix Consulting Group Page 2 Packet Pg. 1 11 CITY OF SAN BERNARDINO, CALIFORNIA Management Study of the Code Enforcement Division m • The staff of the Code Enforcement Division have been moved to City Hall for 0 better interaction, customer service and supervision. r • The Code Compliance Processing Assistants were consolidated with the counter 0 staff of the Community Development Department so that zoning and building code questions potentially resulting from Notices of Violation issued by the m Division could be answered in one location. E • Annual performance evaluations that had not occurred for as much as 6 years were brought current. • Nine Code Enforcement Officers received professional certification in 2011. Overall, these strengths provide a sound basis for the recommended improvements in c 0 the Division. M d rr 3. KEY INITIATIVES o Based upon the evaluation of the Division, it is apparent that the Division faces a T 'O number of challenges and significant opportunities for improvement. These .2 opportunities are portrayed below. E E m (1) Accountability The driving force behind any high performing organization is clear direction and c .T the accountability systems that communicate and translate policy into action. The 2 v Division faces a number of challenges to use its resources more efficiently and E u effectively, and more importantly, to redirect resources and invest in preservation and w 0 revitalization of the City's neighborhoods. The Division is limited in its ability to address o U 0 these challenges as a result of the lack of accountability systems. s v is Primary recommendations contained within this report to address these m challenges are presented below. y • The Code Enforcement Division should enhance its performance measures. Possible performance measures are included in Exhibit 8 in this report. E L u m Q Matrix Consulting Group Page 3 Packef P9,664 8.A.a CITY OF SAN BERNARDINO, CALIFORNIA Management Study of the Code Enforcement Division m • The Code Enforcement Division should develop a two (2) to three (3) page v monthly performance measurement report that effectively communicate results L generated by the Division to management and to the public. A possible template for a monthly performance measurement report is presented in Exhibit 9 in this report. N • The Code Enforcement Division manager and supervisors should develop a number of monthly management information reports using GOEnforce to track E performance against objectives for first site visits after a case has been opened, for closure of cases, and to monitor the case workload and performance Code Compliance Officers. 0 N • The manager and supervisors of the Code Enforcement Division should be held accountable for using information within GOEnforce to manage the workload and performance of the Division and its Code Compliance Officers. o w • The Code Enforcement Division should establish a metric that requires the assignment of new cases by the Code Enforcement Division supervisors to the appropriate Code Compliance Officer within one (1) workday after receipt of the ;, case from the complainant. N r v • The Code Enforcement Division should adopt the metrics as recommended in a the table below for case handling and processing by Code Compliance Officers including (1) an initial site visit / investigation and (2) the case closure for E voluntary compliance and forced compliance. o c Amount of m f Memo Calendar Da s o Number of calendar days from case receipt to voluntary compliance `" Z Property maintenance, zoning, nuisance abatement, etc. cases 30 calendar da s c Sub-standard housing and dangerous building cases 60 calendar da s m E a Number of calendar days from case receipt to forced compliance ;? 0 Pro a maintenance,zoning, nuisance abatement,etc. cases 90 calendar da s u`c Sub-standard housing and dangerous building cases 120 calendar days m v 0 Number of calendar days from case receipt to first site visit and initial 3 calendar days U investi ation 0 'v • The Code Enforcement Division should set an objective for each Code Compliance Officer of generating not less than 40% of their caseload proactively, m" excluding single-family rentals, multi-family rentals, 72-hour parking citations, and discretionary permit conditions annual inspections. M • The Code Enforcement Division Manager should hold the Code Compliance supervisors accountable for assuring that their assigned Code Compliance Officers consistently meet these metrics. u a Matrix Consulting Group Page 4 CITY OF SAN BERNARDINO, CALIFORNIA Management Study of the Code Enforcement Division m a 0 • The Code Enforcement Division should adopt productivity metrics for the Code L Compliance Officers as recommended within table below. `o Type of Productivity Metric Metrico to to Number of complaint-based or proactive code 50 active or open cases at any one time or a enforcement complaints assigned to a Code total of 600 cases per year per Code E Compliance Officer Compliance Officer d rn m c Single-Family Rental and Multi-Family Rental 12 to 15 rental inspections per day or 2,760 Inspections to 3,450 inspections per year per Code .. Compliance Officer n The Division should employ these accountability systems to make the Division a place v c where performance is centered around metrics and performance expectations that 2 v serve to drive its operations and employees to excellence in the service of the City, its N A residents, and businesses. N T (2) Administrative and Management Structure rn The Matrix Consulting Group evaluated the plan or organization of the Code E E Enforcement Division from a number of vantage points including resource utilization, m communication and coordination, agility and flexibility, human capital, and clarity of a .N accountability. c c The Code Enforcement Division should change from the existing program E U assignments and assign each Code Compliance Officer to a specific geographical area w c w or areas within the City based upon a workload assessment. The Code Compliance o U Officers should be responsible for the full range of City ordinances pertaining to the $ S Division within that geographic area or areas. The Code Compliance supervisors should d M each be assigned a district within the City with responsibility for supervising all of the w Code Compliance Officers within that district. c m E L U N Q Matrix Consulting Group Page 5 =P�cketPg.666' CITY OF SAN BERNARDINO, CALIFORNIA Management Study of the Code Enforcement Division v The City should consider the centralization of the placement of liens on private 0 0 property in the Office of the City Clerk, which has more expertise in this business 0 T process than any other division or department in the City. The Office of the City Clerk U) should work with the Code Enforcement Division and the Fire Department to document d E v the workload associated with this reassignment of responsibility, document the staffing R implications, if any, and bring this issue to the City Council for the consideration of the 0 N N City Council (3) Cost Effective Service Delivery `o 0 The Code Enforcement Division faces a number of challenges including fiscal N limitations and improving its working relationships with other City departments to ;, N revitalize City neighborhoods. The effective response of the Division to these challenges requires that the Division transform the way it does its business. The proposed E E transformation is presented below. A • The Code Enforcement Division and the Office of the City Attorney should work together in the development of a foreclosure ordinance for the `o consideration of the Mayor and City Council. The Code Enforcement Division should be responsible for the administration of the ordinance; the Division has o more than sufficient authorized positions to administer the ordinance. E • The single-family rental and multi-family rental ordinances should require that single-family rentals and multi-family rentals be inspected not less c than once every four years, but that inspection frequency should be based d upon historical data regarding violations and previous inspections, with o inspection frequency based upon those conditions. The single-family rental v 0 and multi-family rental properties that meet maintenance standards should be =_ self-certified automatically and inspected once every four years. The fees charged to single-family rentals and multi-family rentals should be based upon the frequency of inspection i.e., a higher frequency pays a higher fee reflecting 00 the cost of that frequency of inspection, while a lower frequency of inspection w pays a lower fee. m m • The Code Enforcement Division should complete an inventory of illegal or abandoned signs by June 30, 2012. The Code Enforcement Division Manager, E U A >r Q Matrix Consulting Group Page 6 Packet Pg..667 ... 8.A.a '. CITY OF SAN BERNARDINO, CALIFORNIA Management Study of the Code Enforcement Division a and the supervisors within the Division should be held accountable for assuring 0 that the Division complies with the requirements of the Sign Regulations, that the r Division completes an inventory of illegal or abandoned signs, and that the Division abates illegal or abandoned signs within 60-days after the completion of 0 the inventory. U) • The Code Enforcement Division should conduct regular reviews of the aZ ordinances that it enforces. The Division should initially work with the business a community, the Chamber of Commerce, the Planning Division in the review of 0 the existing Sign Regulations in fiscal year 2012-13. • The Code Enforcement Division should collect data at the neighborhood- level to identify the neighborhoods in the City with the greatest need for public sector intervention. The Code Enforcement Division should provide data so that the Planning Division can develop neighborhood revitalization plans for `o those neighborhoods in the City that are in the greatest need of public sector .L intervention. The development of the neighborhood revitalization plans should be based upon a collaborative effort include the Community Development N Department, Office of the City Manager, Police Department, Fire Department, Parks and Recreation Department, and Public Works Department. T 9 The Code Compliance Officers in the Code Enforcement Division should be y responsible as case managers responsible for managing all aspects of a code enforcement case including being the single point of contact for £ complainants, managing the timeliness of the processing of the case in accordance with adopted metrics, taking an active role in managing the case through the process including resolving delays in the processing of the case, and 2 coordinating a multi-disciplined, multi-department team in the processing, o investigation, and closure of cases when voluntary compliance has clearly been T achieved or forced compliance is clearly achieved. c v The Code Enforcement Division should be more aggressive in addressing d properties with chronic or repeated violations. The Division should provide proactive inspection of properties with multiple and discrete violations in one calendar year to assure the properties do not regress after corrections to code d violations have been made. These proactive inspections should not be made any o less than once a month. The Division should issue administrative civil penalties U 0 as an initial action for properties that have more than two discrete violations in s one calendar year. The Division should function as a "case manager' for these R chronic violators coordinating the entire City's response to properties that are d chronic violators. 1° c @ ul The Code Enforcement Division Manager should work with CDBG ro Coordinator in the City Manager's Office to develop a larger array of CDBG financial resources to assist low and moderate-income homeowners rehabilitate their homes. The Code Enforcement Division Manager should take Ec U Q Matrix Consulting Group Page 7 Packet Pg.668 BA.a CITY OF SAN BERNARDINO, CALIFORNIA Management Study of the Code Enforcement Division m the lead in working with the CDBG Coordinator to expand the CDBG financial 0 resources available to low and moderate-income homeowners and promote the t availability of these resources. At present, CDBG financial resources allocated to w the Code Enforcement Division are used for funding the costs of many positions 0 within the Division. These resources should be also be allocated to fund the rehabilitation of homes. w c a The Code Enforcement Division Manager should deploy a management E style among his I her supervisory team that fosters working with other City divisions and departments for the betterment of the City. The Code Enforcement Division Manager should conduct periodic meetings with executive management of other City departments to develop more effective working relationships with these departments, the deployment of systems within the Division for enhancing the working relationships with these other City departments, and holding the staff of the Division accountable for working c positively with these other City departments in the betterment of the City. 2 d rr The extent of authorized staffing for the Code Enforcement Division should be reduced through attrition. The City should allocate fifteen (15) Code N Compliance Officers, three (3) Code Compliance Supervisors, one (1) Code Enforcement Division Manager, and three (3) Code Compliance Processing Assistants to the Division. The City should reduce the extent of authorized staffing in the Code Enforcement Division, through attrition, by ten (10) Code c Compliance Officer positions, one (1) Code Compliance Processing Assistant E position, and two (2) Code Compliance Supervisor positions. rn The City has invested considerable financial resources in the Code Enforcement M C 0 Division. A number of steps must be taken to enhance the cost-effective return on that 'o investment. E E m (4) Human Capital `0 The staff of the Code Enforcement Division is critical in the delivery of cost U 0 0 effective services. These staff must be appropriately skilled and trained to deliver U 0 c service. The principal recommendations contained within this report to address the skill R a and training of the staff of the Code Enforcement Division are presented below. 1° c m N • The Code Enforcement Division Manager should develop a training program and o0 plan for the employees of the Division based upon a training needs assessment of these employees. E L U A Q Matrix Consulting Group Page 8 Packet Pg.669'-- CITY OF SAN BERNARDINO, CALIFORNIA Management Study of the Code Enforcement Division m • The City Planner and the Office of the City Attorney should provide ongoing 00 training to the Code Enforcement Division Manager, Code Compliance t Supervisors, Senior Code Compliance Officers, and Code Compliance Officers w regarding the ordinances enforced by the Code Enforcement Division, how to ; interpret these ordinances, how to present cases for hearing officers, how to prepare requests for warrants, etc. N c m • The Community Development Director and the Code Enforcement Division E Manager should develop managerial and supervisory training plans for the A manager and supervisors of the Division. The training plans should be focused on managerial and supervisory training and skill development. 0 H • The job description for the Code Compliance Officer II should be modified to require the incumbent to possess the California Association of Code Enforcement Officers Basic Course Certification Program within 24 months of o hire / appointment. The job description for Senior Code Compliance Officer, A Code Compliance Supervisor, and Code Enforcement Division Manager should be revised to possess the California Association of Code Enforcement Officers N Advanced Course Certification Program within 24 months of hire/ appointment. ;, N • The Code Enforcement Division should budget funds for the costs of the testing required for its employees to take the California Association of Code n Enforcement Officers Course Certification examinations and the costs of ongoing n training required to maintain such certification. m The Matrix Consulting Group believes that the staff of the Division is underutilized. More 0 effective utilization of these staff will require enhanced training. __ .Ln (5) Customer Service o d The customers interviewed by the matrix Consulting Group acknowledged much E U of the good work being done by the Division, but strongly emphasized that the Division U1 U needs to enhance how it works with the neighborhoods and businesses in the City. o U O Primary recommendations contained within this report to address this challenge are = v presented below. m • The Code Enforcement Division manager and supervisors should develop customer service metrics for each of its programs (i.e., property maintenance, ro single-family rental inspections, etc.). c v E L U A Q Matrix Consulting Group Page 9 Packet Pg. 670 CITY OF SAN BERNARDINO, CALIFORNIA Management Study of the Code Enforcement Division d • The Code Enforcement Division manager and supervisors should make sure that 0 all of the Division's employees know the results of how well (or not) the Division is meeting customer service standards and give recognition for the things that are going well during performance evaluations and the periodic Division meetings with all Division employees. 3 • The Code Enforcement Division manager and supervisors should be held v accountable for making sure that the employees of the Division consistently meet E the customer service standards adopted by the Division R • The Code Enforcement Division should notify the complainant of the name of the Code Compliance Officer assigned their case no later than five working days N after the submittal of their application including their name, e-mail address, and phone number. c 0 • The managers and supervisors of the Code Enforcement Division should make random telephone contacts with customers not less than twice a month. The purpose of these contacts should be to elicit feedback from these customers N regarding the quality and timeliness of the service provided by the Division. The results of these contacts should be summarized in a simple e-mail to the Community Development Director to provide constant feedback. $ 3 • The Code Enforcement Division should develop a proactive team that includes manager, supervisors, and Code Compliance Officers (as these staff are E available) to communicate the key messages of the Division, and make m presentations to civic organizations, service clubs, neighborhood associations, chamber of commerce, etc., that convey the key messages of the Division not M less than once every month. `_ .y 2 • The Code Enforcement Division should develop an enhanced set of educational o materials about the code enforcement process, common code violations, and the d kinds of activities that require a permit. The description of code enforcement d processes should include an overview of the avenues available to property owners to resolve violations, including the Notice of Violation process, voluntary compliance, and administrative citations and administrative civil penalties; and the materials should provide an overview of the appeal and penalty processes. c These materials should include definitions and descriptions stated clearly in lay u 0 terms. 'v • The Code Enforcement Division, in its Notice of Violation letters to property v owners, should include educational materials on the code enforcement process. m t U) N • The Division should revise the point at which it asks the complainant to rate their ru satisfaction with the services provided by the Division. The Division should request that evaluation of its services in the CRM by the complainant after the case has been closed. r Matrix Consulting Group Page 10 CITY OF SAN BERNARDINO, CALIFORNIA Management Study of the Code Enforcement Division m 0 0 While it is difficult for any code enforcement division to earn the consistent gratitude of 0 w neighborhoods and businesses for the work that their employees provide, the Matrix 0 v Consulting Group believes that these measures, and others recommended within the rn c m report, will enhance the relationship of the Division with the neighborhoods and v rn A businesses in the City. 4. SUMMARY OF RECOMMENDATIONS. The table on the following page presents a summary of the recommendations P C 0 contained within the report. A d rr Before the City begins implementing this study, we suggest that it take the N C6 N actions noted below. T 9 Recommendation #1: The management study of the Code Enforcement Division y should be distributed to the employees of the Division, the managers of the 15 Community Development, Police, and Fire departments, the Office of the City E Manager, and customers of the services provided by the Division for review and m input. Recommendation #2: The Code Enforcement Division Manager should review the `o proposed plan of implementation and the summary of recommendations A contained in this report, modify the plan of implementation as appropriate, and o submit the revised plan of implementation to the Community Development d Director. E d U Recommendation #3: After acceptance of the report and the implementation plan by the City Council and City Manager, a semi-annual status report outlining U implementation progress should be provided by the Code Enforcement Division c Manager to the Community Development Director and the City Manager for 0 0 presentation to the City Council. A IL m N m aD C d E r U A Q Matrix Consulting Group Page 11 Packet PgC 672 '' CITY OF SAN BERNARDINO, CALIFORNIA Management Study of the Code Enforcement Division y 9 0 SUMMARY OF RECOMMENDATIONS t Rec. Timeline for o No. Recommendation sponsibility Implementation v Chapter 1 -Introduction and Executive Summary 1 The management study of the Code Enforcement Division Code 3rd quarter FY rn should be distributed to the employees of the Division, the Enforcement 2011-12 m managers of the Community Development, Police, and Fire Division E departments, Office of the City Manager, and customers of Manager the services provided by the Division for review and input. 2 The Code Enforcement Division Manager should review the Code 3rd quarter FY proposed plan of implementation and the summary of Enforcement 2011-12 e recommendations contained in this report, modify the plan of Division N implementation as appropriate,and submit the revised plan Manager of implementation to the Community Develop mant Director. 3 After acceptance of the report and the implementation plan Code Beginning 2nd by the City Council and City Manager, a semi-annual status Enforcement quarter FY 4 report outlining implementation progress should be provided Division 2012-13 > by the Code Enforcement Division Manager to the Manager Community Development Director and City Manager for w presentation to the City Council. Chapter 6 -Analysis of the Plan of Organization c°',+ 4 The Code Enforcement Division should assign each Code Code 3rd quarter FY T Compliance Officer to a specific geographical area within Enforcement 2011-12 the City based upon a workload assessment.The Code Division rn Compliance Officers should be responsible for the full range Manager of City ordinances pertaining to the Division within that v eo ra hic area. m 5 The Code Compliance supervisors should each be assigned Code 3rd quarter FY A a district within the City with responsibility for supervising Enforcement 2011-12 Code Compliance Officers within that district. Division Manager 0 6 The two(2)Senior Code Compliance Officers should be Community 3rd quarter FY .T reclassified to Code Compliance Supervisor if the Development 2011-12 '- incumbents meet the minimum qualifications for that Director classification: Code Compliance Supervisor a 7 The four(4)Code Compliance Processing Assistant Community 2nd quarter FY E positions should be reclassified to Customer Service Development 2011-12 2 Representatives. Director w c 6 A Code Compliance Supervisor position should be Community TBD w eliminated through attrition.This is based upon the existing Development v staffing levels within the Division and the existing spans of Director I j control. o Chapter 7 -Analysis of Management Systems F v 9 The Code Enforcement Division should develop a clearly Code firth quarter FY m written,five-year minimum, strategic plan. Enforcement 2011-12 E Division to Manager 10 The Code Enforcement Division Manager should direct the Code 4rth quarter FY to Code Compliance supervisors, as appropriate,to develop Enforcement 2011-12 m and implement the strategic plan. Division Manager 11 The Code Enforcement Division should develop goals and Code 4rth quarter FY v r'^ ob'ectives for each program within the Division. Enforcement 2011-12 Matrix Consulting Group Page 12 PacketPg. 673 CITY OF SAN BERNARDINO, CALIFORNIA Management Study of the Code Enforcement Division m v © Rec. Timeline for o No. Recommendation Res onsibili Im lementation U d Division Manager o 12 The Code Enforcement Division should enhance its Code 3rd quarter FY T v performance measures. Enforcement 2011-12 Division u! Manager m 13 The Administrative Analyst within the Community Community 3rd quarter FY v Development Department should be assigned responsibility Development 2011-12 m for providing training and technical assistance to the Code Director Enforcement Division manager and supervisors in the 2 development of goals,objectives,and performance o measures. 14 The Code Enforcement Division should develop a two (2)to Code 3rd quarter FY ,..- three (3)page monthly performance measurement report Enforcement 2011-12 that effectively communicate results generated by the Division c Division to management and to the public. Mana er 0 .y 15 The Code Enforcement Division manager and supervisors Code 3rd quarter FY should develop a number of monthly management Enforcement 2011-12 information reports using GOEnforce to track performance Division a against objectives for first site visits after a case has been Manager 0 opened,for closure of cases,and to monitor the case �+ workload and performance Code Compliance Officers. 16 The manager and supervisors of the Code Enforcement Community 4rth quarter FY Division should be held accountable for using information Development 2011-12 rn within GOEnforce to manage the workload and performance Director of the Division and the performance of its Code Compliance ^' Officers. 0 17 The Code Compliance supervisors should review each and Code 4rth quarter FY m every case within GOEnforce to assure there is sufficient Enforcement 2011-12 m basis and documentation for closure. Division Manager 0 18 If there is insufficient documentation and basis for closing a Code 4rth quarter FYI case or errors in data entry based upon supervisory review, Enforcement 2011-12 '- 0 the case should be returned to the Code Compliance Officer Division for continued work and effort to achieve full and complete Manager E closure of a case. v 19 The Code Compliance supervisors should be held Code 4rth quarter FY accountable for assuring that cases are only closed when all Enforcement 2011-12 of the investigation in the field, in the office, and all of the Division w associated paperwork has been completed. Manager v 20 The Code Compliance Officers should be held accountable Code 3rd quarter FY tot for the quality and completeness of the data entered into the Enforcement 2011-12 °c GOEnforce information system regarding their assigned Division v cases. Manager A 21 The Code Compliance supervisors should be held Code 3rd quarter FY F accountable for ensuring that the Code Compliance Officers Enforcement 2011-12 m assigned to their team for supervision maintain the quality Division and completeness of data in the GOEnforoe information Manager w system regarding the cases assigned to their Code m Compliance Officers. 0° 22 The Code Enforcement Division Manager should emphasize Code 3rd quarter FY w in formal written procedures the importance of keeping Enforcement 2011-12 E accurate data in GOEnforce, provide direction for proper Division s U Q Matrix Consulting Group Page 13 Packet Pg. 674 CITY OF SAN BERNARDINO, CALIFORNIA Management Study of the Code Enforcement Division v 9 Rea Timeline for o No. Recommendation Responsiblilly Implementation U m records management, monitor conditions and provide Manager corrective action as needed. c 23 The Administrative Analyst for the Community Development Community 3rd quarter FY v Department should audit the quality of the data within the Development 2011-12 GOEnforce information system on a monthly basis and Director N report the results to the Community Development Director. m 24 The Code Enforcement Division should develop a Code 3rd quarter FY E procedures manual that contains, at a minimum,the Enforcement 2011-12 procedures recommended in exhibit 11. Division Mana er 25 The Division should establish a policies and procedures Code 3rd quarter FY c committee, consisting of five to seven staff,that includes a Enforcement 2011-12 n representation of staff at all levels in the Division to develop Division the procedures manual Mana er 26 The Code Enforcement Division Manager should be Code 3rd quarter FY assigned responsibility for development of the procedures Enforcement 2011-12 °- A manual working with the committee. Division > Manager 27 The Code Enforcement Division Manager should develop Code 3rd quarter FY a and implement procedures for monitoring, along with Enforcement 2011-12 procedures for corrective action, to ensure compliance with Division N the Division's procedures by the staff of the Division. Manager 28 The Code Enforcement Division Manager should develop, Code 3rd quarter FY implement, and monitor a training plan for the staff of the Enforcement 2011-12 Division to ensure the staff receives adequate education and Division training related to the Division's procedures and the Manager m implementation and administration of these procedures. d 29 The Code Enforcement Division should develop and adopt Code 4rth quarter FY written protocols with the Police and Fire departments Enforcement 2011-12 regarding the delivery of services pertaining to the Division g Homeless Advocacy Program, the administration of the Manager 0 0 Crime Free Ordinance, Operation Phoenix, and the '_^ inspection of multi-family residences. : 0 Chapter 8 -Analysis of Codes and Ordinances 30 The Code Enforcement Division and the Office of the City Code 1st quarter FY E Attorney should work together in the development of a Enforcement 2012-13 U foreclosure ordinance for the consideration of the Mayor and Division Manager ° Ci Council. 0 31 The Code Enforcement Division should be responsible for Code 2nd quarter FY w the administration of the ordinance;the Division has more Enforcement 2012-13 v than sufficient authorized positions to administer the Division u ordinance. Manager o 32 The ordinance should require lenders to act on the Code 1st quarter FY E "Abandonment and Waste"clause within their mortgage Enforcement 2012-13 contract. Division Manager m 33 The ordinance should require that the lenders register the Code 1st quarter FY a vacant abandoned property with the City. Enforcement 2012-13 N Division ro Manager 34 The City should adopt a fee to recover the costs for Code 1st quarter FY administration of the foreclosure ordinance. Enforcement 2012-13 E Division z U Q Matrix Consulting Group Page 14 Packet Pg.675 8.A.a CITY OF SAN BERNARDINO, CALIFORNIA Management Study of the Code Enforcement Division v Q Rec. Timeline for ° No. Recommendation Responsibility Implementation U v Manager $ 35 The single-family rental and multi-family rental ordinances Code 1st quarter FY o should require that single-family rentals and multi-family Enforcement 2012-13 v rentals be inspected not less than once every four years, but Division R that inspection frequency should be based upon historical Manager w data regarding violations and previous inspections, with m ins ection frequency based upon those conditions. E 36 The single-family rental and multi-family rental properties Code 1st quarter FY m that meet maintenance standards should be self-certified Enforcement 2012-13 automatically and inspected once every four years. Division Manager 37 The fees charged to single-family rentals and multi-family Code 1 st quarter FY N rentals should be based upon the frequency of inspection Enforcement 2012-13 i.e.,a higher frequency pays a higher fee reflecting the cost Division of that frequency of inspection, while a lower frequency of Manager inspection pays a lower fee. °- 38 The Code Enforcement Division should complete an Code 4rth quarter FY .5 inventory of illegal or abandoned signs by June 30,2012. Enforcement 2011-12 Division w Manager 39 The manager and supervisors of the Code Enforcement Code 4rth quarter FY r Division should be held accountable for assuring that the Enforcement 2011-12 Division complies with the requirements of the Sign Division Regulations,that the Division completes an inventory of Manager N illegal or abandoned signs, and that the Division abates c illegal or abandoned signs within 60-days after the completion of the inventory.. v 40 The Code Enforcement Division should conduct regular Code 2nd quarter FY n reviews of the ordinances that it enforces in concert with the Enforcement 2012-13 Office of the City Attorney. Division Manager 0 41 The Division should initially work with the business Code 2nd quarter FY A community, Chamber of Commerce,and the Planning Enforcement 2012-13 Division in the review of the existing Sign Regulations in Division fiscal year 2012-13. Manager v Chapter 9-Analysis of Training and Certification E v 42 The Code Enforcement Division Manager should develop a Code 2nd quarter FY training program and plan for the employees of the Division Enforcement 2012-13 0 based upon a training needs assessment. Division w Manager m v 43 The Code Enforcement Division Manager should develop a Code 2nd quarter FY 0 procedure regarding professional development and training Enforcement 2012-13 0 of the staff of the Division. Division c Manager a 44 The City Planner and the Office of the City Attorney should Code 1st quarter FY provide ongoing training to the Code Enforcement Division Enforcement 2012-13 m Manager, Code Compliance Supervisors, Senior Code Division `m Compliance Officers, and Code Compliance Officers Manager m regarding how the ordinances enforced by the Code m Enforcement Division, how to interpret these ordinances, how to present cases for hearing officers, how to prepare requests for warrants, etc. a E U A Q Matrix Consulting Group Page 15 Packet Pg. 676 S.A.a CITY OF SAN BERNARDINO, CALIFORNIA Management Study of the Code Enforcement Division m Rec. Timeline for o No. Recommendation Responsibility Implementation d 45 The Community Development Director and the Code Code 1st quarter FY Enforcement Division Manager should develop managerial Enforcement 2012-13 0 and supervisory training plans for the manager and Division r supervisors of the Code Enforcement Division. The training Manager plans should be focused on managerial and supervisory yr training and skill development. d 46 The job description for the Code Compliance Officer II Code 1st quarter FY E should be modified to require the incumbent to possess the Enforcement 2012-13 rn California Association of Code Enforcement Officers Basic Division c Course Certification Program within 24 months of hire/ Manager appointment. 47 The job description for Senior Code Compliance Officer, Code 1 st quarter FY Code Compliance Supervisor, and Code Enforcement Enforcement 2012-13 Division Manager should be revised to possess the Division California Association of Code Enforcement Officers Manager Advanced Course Certification Program within 24 months of o hire/appointment. 48 The Code Enforcement Division should budget funds for the Code 1 st quarter FY costs of the testing required for its employees to take the Enforcement 2012-13 w California Association of Code Enforcement Officers Course Division Certification examinations and the costs of ongoing training Manager N re uired to maintain such certification. 49 The acquisition and maintenance of California Association of Code 1st quarter FYa Code Enforcement Officers Course Certification by Enforcement 2012-13 ' employees should be integrated into the annual training Division In plans developed by the manager and supervisors of the Manager d Division. E Chapter 10-Analysis of Customer Service m 50 The manager and supervisors of the Code Enforcement Code 2nd quarter FY Division should develop customer service metrics for each Enforcement 2012-13 of its programs(i.e., property maintenance, single-family Division o rental inspections, etc. . Manager w 51 The Code Enforcement Division should publish these Code 2nd quarter FY '- customer service metrics to its web site. Enforcement 2012-13 Division `m Manager E 52 The manager and supervisors of the Code Enforcement Code 2nd quarter FY Division should make sure that all of the Division's Enforcement 2012-13 employees knows the results of how well (or not)the Division w Division is meeting customer service standards and give Manager v recognition for the things that are going well during u performance evaluations and the periodic Division meetings o with all Division employees S 53 The manager and supervisors of the Code Enforcement Code 2nd quarter FT_ m Division should be held accountable for making sure that the Enforcement 2012-13 employees of the Division consistently meet the customer Division m to service standards adopted by the Division Manager c 54 The Code Enforcement Division should notify the Code 1 st quarter FY m complainant of the name of the Code Compliance Officer Enforcement 2012-13 00 assigned their case no later than five working days after the Division submittal of their application including their name, e-mail Manager address, and phone number. E Q Matrix Consulting Group Page 16 Packet Pg. 677 CITY OF SAN BERNARDINO, CALIFORNIA Management Study of the Code Enforcement Division m v Rec. Timeline for ° No. Recommendation Responsibility Implementation U ° 55 The Code Enforcement Division should revise its web page Code 1st quarter FY to include"How Are We Doing"—and provide options to the Enforcement 2012-13 `o customer regarding whom to contact if things go wrong in Division T a ' the delivery of service by the Division. Manager 3 56 The customer satisfaction results collected from the Code Code 1st quarter FY w Enforcement Division's web page regarding the"How Are Enforcement 2012-13 We Doing" survey should be summarized not less than once Division E a year on that web page so that customers can monitor how Manager rn well other customers perceive the quality and responsiveness of the services provided by the Division. g 57 The managers and supervisors of the Code Enforcement Code 1st quarter FY Division should make random telephone contacts with Enforcement 2012-13 customers not less than twice a month. The purpose of Division these contacts should be to elicit feedback from these Manager customers regarding the quality and timeliness of the service provided by the Division. The results of these 2 contacts should be summarized in a simple e-mail to the .h Community Development Director to provide constant K feedback. N 58 The Code Enforcement Division should be proactive in Code 1st quarter FY seeking feedback from customers by sending a link to an Enforcement 2012-13 on-line survey using Survey Monkey.This should be done Division not less than once annually. Manager a 59 The Code Enforcement Division should publish the results of Code 2nd quarter FY the proactive customer satisfaction survey to their web site. Enforcement 2012-13 N O Division Manager E E 0 60 The Code Enforcement Division should analyze the results Code 2nd quarter FY � of the proactive customer survey once a year and identify Enforcement 2012-13 m measures that the Division is taking to improve customer Division � service. Manager 0 61 The manager and supervisors of the Code Enforcement Code 1 st quarter FY .y Division should develop and adopt a customer service Enforcement 2012-13 5 procedure. Division Manager w 62 The manager and supervisors of the Code Enforcement Code 2nd quarter FY E Division should provide an orientation to all employees for Enforcement 2012-13 u the Department regarding the customer service policy and Division metrics of the Department. Manager w 63 The Code Enforcement Division should develop a formal Code 3rd quarter FY v written communications plan. Enforcement 2012-13 ° U Division o Manager c 64 The Code Enforcement Division should update the Code 3rd quarter FY m communications plan not less than once every three years. Enforcement 2012-13 E Division to Manager 65 The Code Enforcement Division should develop a proactive Code 3rd quarter FY y team that includes the Division's manager, supervisors, and Enforcement 2012-13 m Code Compliance Officers to communicate the key Division messages of the Division, and make presentations to civic Manager organizations, service clubs, neighborhood associations, chamber of commerce, etc., that convey the key messages z U R Q Matrix Consulting Group Page 17 PacketPg. 678 S,A.a CITY OF SAN BERNARDINO, CALIFORNIA Management Study of the Code Enforcement Division v a Rec. Timeline for No. Recommendation Responsibility Implementation U v of the Division not less than once every month. 66 The Code Enforcement Division Manager should enhance Code 3rd quarter FY o the web page of the Division. Enforcement 2012-13 a Division Manager (n 67 The Code Enforcement Division should publish an electronic Code 3rd quarter FY w article in the Community Development Department Enforcement 2012-13 E newsletter once every three months. Division rn Manager c 68 The Community Development Department should enable Code 3rd quarter FY residents and businesses to subscribe, electronically,to the Enforcement 2012-13 newsletter and receive the newsletter electronically. Division Manager 69 The Code Enforcement Division should use"social media" Code 3rd quarter FY to communicate with the residents and businesses of San Enforcement 2012-13 Bernardino. Division Manager An 70 The Code Enforcement Division should develop an Code 3rd quarter FY enhanced set of educational materials about the code Enforcement 2012-13 a enforcement process, common code violations, and the Division kinds of activities that require a permit. The description of Manager N code enforcement processes should include an overview of the avenues available to property owners to resolve v violations, including the Notice of Violation process, ' voluntary compliance, and administrative citations and rn administrative civil penalties; and the materials should v provide an overview of the appeal and penalty processes. E These materials should include definitions and descriptions m stated clearly in lay terms. 71 The Code Enforcement Division should investigate and Code 3rd quarter FY pursue additional distribution venues for these materials to Enforcement 2012-13 0 support its stated goal of educating the community. Division '0 Manager ' 72 The Code Enforcement Division, in its Notice of Violation Code 3rd quarter FY ° letters to property owners, should include educational Enforcement 2012-13 v materials on the code enforcement process. Division E m Manager � 73 The Division should revise the point at which it asks the Code 1 st quarter FY complainant to rate their satisfaction with the services Enforcement 2012-13 w provided by the Division.The Division should request that Division v evaluation of its services in the CRM by the complainant Manager 0 after the case has been closed. c) 0 Chapter 11 -Analysis of Information Technology E 74 The City should utilize the automated information system Code 1st quarter FY -6 m (GOEnforce)to provide the capacity for residents, Enforcement 2012-13 businesses,and other interested parties regarding possible Division m code violations through the Internet. Manager c 75 All of the divisions in the Community Development Code 4rth quarter FY ri Department should utilize the New World enterprise Enforcement 2012-13 ao resource planning system for all aspects of the land Division m entitlement and building permit process and resolution of Manager violations of City codes.This includes the Code w �. Enforcement Division. E 0 A Q Matrix Consulting Group Page 18 r7-P 6 Pg.6679 B.A.a CITY OF SAN BERNARDINO, CALIFORNIA Management Study of the Code Enforcement Division v a Roe. Timeline for _ No. Recommendation Responsibility Implementation U y 76 Modules, applications and reports should be developed Code 4rth quarter FY $ within the New World enterprise resource planning system Enforcement 2012-13 0 to support the work of the divisions within the Community Division T a Development Department. Manager 77 Training should be provided to staff of the Community Code 4rth quarter FY (n Development Department as appropriate in the use of the Enforcement 2012-13 a New World enterprise resource planning system. Division E Manager s 78 The Code Enforcement Division Manager should work with Code 4rth quarter FY c the Information Technology Division to address the GIS Enforcement 2012-13 M needs in the Code Enforcement Division in concert with the Division deployment of the New World enterprise resource planning Manager N informations stem. 79 The weed abatement program should migrate from the Code 4rth quarter FY legacy information system developed by the Information Enforcement 2012-13 Technology Division to the New World enterprise resource Division 2 planning system or informationsystem). Mana er w 80 The development of modules within the New World Code 4rth quarter FY enterprise resource planning system (or information system) Enforcement 2012-13 for the Code Enforcement Division should integrate the Division needs of the weed abatement program.This should be Manager N based upon the development of a needs requirement developed by the Code Enforcement Division Manager and a 3 the Information Technology Division. y 81 The Code Enforcement Division should develop an Code 3rd quarter FY © implementation plan for the deployment of the New World Enforcement 2011-12 n c enterprise planning system by the Division. Division E Manager o m 82 The Code Enforcement Division should develop a Code 3rd quarter FY replacement plan for its laptops and portable printers in Enforcement 2011-12 consultation with the Information Technology Division,and Division o request budgetary approval for replacement of this Manager .0 equipment based upon the replacement plan. Chapter 12-Analysis of Code Enforcement Operations ° 83 The Code Enforcement Division should collect data at the Code 1 st quarter FY v neighborhood-level to identify the neighborhoods in the City Enforcement 2012-13 E v with the greatest need for public sector intervention. Division Manager o 84 The Planning Division should develop neighborhood City Planner 4rth quarter FY w revitalization plans for those neighborhoods in the City that 2012-13 are in the greatest need of public sector intervention. o U 85 The development of the neighborhood revitalization plans Code 3rd quarter FY o should be based upon a collaborative effort include the Enforcement 2012-13 v Community Development Department, Office of the City Division Manager, Police Department, Fire Department, Parks and Manager Recreation Department, and Public Works Department. m 86 The Code Enforcement Division should set an objective for Code 3rd quarter FY each Code Compliance Officer of generating not less than Enforcement 2011-12 cn 40%of their caseload proactively, excluding single-family Division ro rentals, multi-family rentals, 72-hour parking citations, and Manager discretionary permit conditions annual inspections. 87 The Code Compliance Officer with a special assignment Code 3rd quarter FY (Crime Free Rental Housing)should be exempted from this Enforcement 2011-12 x Q Matrix Consulting Group page 19 Packet Pg. 880 S.A.a CITY OF SAN BERNARDINO, CALIFORNIA Management Study of the Code Enforcement Division v v Rec. Timeline for o No. Recommendation Responsibility Implementation U m requirement. Division Manager o 88 The manager and supervisors of the Code Enforcement Code 3rd quarter FY v Division should hold the Code Compliance Officers Enforcement 2011-12 accountable for achieving this objective, and take Division y disciplinary action for consistent failure to substantively meet Manager m this objective. E 89 The Code Enforcement Division should develop a formal Code 4rth quarter FY rn written priority procedure that ranks code violation Enforcement 2011-12 complaints in order of priority. Division Manager " 0 90 The formal written priority procedure should include Code 4rth quarter FY � N deadlines for the first site visit and for issuance of the Notice Enforcement 2011-12 of Violation, if warranted. Division Manager c 91 The supervisors of the Code Enforcement Division should Code 4rth quarter FY 2 assign these priorities when the case is assigned to a Code Enforcement 2011-12 An Compliance Officer. Division Manager 92 The Code Enforcement Division Manager should provide Code 4rth quarter FY training to all of the Code Compliance Officers in these Enforcement 2011-12 ry priorities and their implications in terms of the timing or Division deadlines for the first site visit and the issuance of a Notice Manager 3 of Violation, if warranted. n 93 The Code Enforcement Division Manager should develop Code 4rth quarter FY � © and adopt a written Division procedure for the timeliness of Enforcement 2011-12 m case assignment and distribution after case intake. Division w Manager m 94 The Code Enforcement Division should establish a metric Code 4rth quarter FY m that requires the assignment of new cases by the Code Enforcement 2011-12 Compliance supervisors to the appropriate Code Division o Compliance Officer within one (1)workday after receipt of Manager .y the case from the complainant. '- 95 The Code Enforcement Division Manager should hold the Code 4rth quarter FY Code Compliance supervisors accountable for meeting the Enforcement 2011-12 timeline for assignment of the case to the Code Compliance Division E E Officer within one(1)workday after intake of the case from Manager the complainant. c 96 The Code Enforcement Division Manager should develop Code 3rd quarter FY w and adopt a written Division procedure for metrics for case Enforcement 2011-12 v handling and processing by Code Compliance Officers after Division o U assi omen[of new cases to the Code Compliance Officers. Manager o 97 The Code Enforcement Division should adopt the metrics as Code 3rd quarter FY E a recommended within this report for case handling and Enforcement 2011-12 processing by Code Compliance Officers including (1)an Division E initial site visit/investigation and (2)the case closure for Manager m voluntary compliance and forced compliance c 98 The Code Enforcement Division Manager should hold the Code 3rd quarter FY u> Code Compliance supervisors accountable for assuring that Enforcement 2011-12 ro their assigned Code Compliance Officers consistently meet Division these metrics. Manager m E s U N Q Matrix Consulting Group Page 20 Packet Pg. 681 CITY OF SAN BERNARDINO, CALIFORNIA Management Study of the Code Enforcement Division m U Rec. Timeline for o No. Recommendation Responsibility Implementation U m 99 The Code Compliance supervisors should clearly be Code 3rd quarter FY assigned responsibility for active supervision of the Enforcement 2011-12 0 investigation and closure of code enforcement rases. Division T v Manager 8 100 The Code Compliance supervisors should be assigned Code 3rd quarter FY ur responsibility for the supervision of the processing of code Enforcement 2011-12 w enforcement cases. This should include the performance of Division E Code Compliance Officers in accordance with adopted Manager m timeliness metrics including the resolution of problems with c metrics for the proces sin of cases. m 101 The Code Enforcement Division Manager should clearly Code 3rd quarter FY spell out the responsibility of the Code Compliance Enforcement 2011-12 N supervisors for the active supervision of the processing, Division investigation, and closure of cases by their assigned Code Manager Compliance Officers in a written procedure. c 102 The City should hold the Code Compliance supervisors Code 3rd quarter FY 2 responsible for meeting the timeline metrics for the Enforcement 2011-12 •� processing, investigation, and closure of cases by their Division m 0 assigned Code Compliance Officers, and for monitoring their Manager a performance against the timeline metrics on an ongoing basis. N 103 The Code Compliance Officers in the Code Enforcement Code 3rd quarter FY Division should be responsible for the management of the Enforcement 2011-12 v processing, investigation and closure of assigned cases in Division accordance with adopted metrics including the resolution of Manager U) 104 The Code Enforcement Division Manager should Cleary Code 3rd quarter FY E spell out the authority and responsibility of the Code Enforcement 2011-12 Compliance Officers as case managers with responsibility Division for the processing, investigation,and closure of rases in a Manager formal written proced ure. 0 105 The supervisors of the Code Enforcement Division should Code 3rd quarter FY 'u+ plan and schedule the processing, investigation, and closure Enforcement 2011-12 of cases using the GOEnforce information system. Division o Manager m 106 The Code Compliance supervisors should monitor and Code 3rd quarter FY E m maintain case assignment and case status information Enforcement 2011-12 versus the plan and schedule using the GOEnforce Division informations stem. Manager w 107 The Code Enforcement Division Manager should develop a Code 4rth quarter FY .o written procedure that requires the Code Compliance Enforcement 2011-12 U supervisors to audit the caseload assigned to each of the Division o Code Compliance Officers under their supervision to Manager c determine to determine whether cases are being effectively T and timely processed, investigated and closed or whether c discussions should be held with the Code Compliance a Officer re ardin g their performance. m c 108 The Code Enforcement Division should adopt productivity Code 3rd quarter FY rn metrics for the Code Compliance Officers as recommended Enforcement 2011-12 ao within the report. Division m Mana er v L U i Q Matrix Consulting Group Page 21 PacketPglfi82 .. B.A.a CITY OF SAN BERNARDINO, CALIFORNIA Management Study of the Code Enforcement Division v © v Rec. Timeline for ° No. Recommendation Responsibility Implementation U ° 109 The Code Compliance Officers should be held accountable Code 3rd quarter FY by the Code Compliance supervisors for consistently Enforcement 2011-12 `o meeting this metric. Division T v Manager 110 The Code Enforcement Division should provide proactive Code 4rth quarter FY rn inspection of properties with multiple and discrete violations Enforcement 2011-12 in one calendar year to assure the properties do not regress Division E after corrections to code violations have been made.These Manager rn proactive inspections should not be made any less than c once a month. m 111 The Code Enforcement Division should issue administrative Code 4rth quarter FY civil penalties as an initial action for properties that have Enforcement 2011-12 N more than two discrete violations in one calendar year. Division Manager 112 The Code Enforcement Division should maintain an Code 4rth quarter FY a inventory of all properties with three or more discrete Enforcement 2011-12 °_ violations in one calendar year. Division .A Manager tr 113 The Code Enforcement Division should provide a list on a Code 4rth quarter FY w monthly basis of the chronic violators in the City that have Enforcement 2011-12 incurred three or more discrete violations in one calendar Division r year including their address,the nature of the violations,the Manager date of the opening of the case by the Division, etc.to the v Police and the Fire departments. ' 114 The Code Enforcement Division should function as a"case Code 4rth quarter FY y © manager"for these chronic violators in which an employee Enforcement 2011-12 within the Division responsible for coordinating the entire Division E City's response to properties that are chronic violators. This Manager m employee would be responsible for"flagging"the property for all staff who interact with it, as well as working with the owner and other involved parties on plans to resolve the o problems by coordinating responses by all of the City's 'w departments as appropriate. This person could also be responsible for gathering appropriate background 0 information for Office of the City Attorney to be used in the v pursuing citations,working with the Office of the City E Manager in pursuing CDBG block grants to improve the ° property,working with the Police Department to obtain ° increased preventive patrol,working with the Fire w Department to abate Fire Code violations,etc. ° 115 The City should not subsidize the cost of the weed Code 4rth quarter FY u abatement program. The fees charged by the Code Enforcement 2011-12 ° Enforcement Division should be increased to fully recover Division E the costs of the weed abatement program. This fee should ManagerO be charged against all vacant lots that are issued Notices of c Violation (or Notices to Clean Regrowth),and a higher fee v be charged to those properties that do not comply with these m Notices of Violation or Notices to Clean Regrowth). rn 116 If a vacant property is not found to be in violation of weed Code 4rth quarter FY abatement requirements and standards,then the property Enforcement 2011-12 m should automatically be enrolled in a self-certification Division program. If a subsequent complaint or proactive inspection Manager m © by a Code Compliance Officer finds the property in violation, E U Q Matrix Consulting Group Page 22 Packet Pg.683 S.A.a CITY OF SAN BERNARDINO, CALIFORNIA Management Study of the Code Enforcement Division v © v Rec. Timeline for C No. Recommendation Responsibility Implementation O d the property should be de-certified for two years until consistent com liance by the property owner is evident. o 117 The staff of the Code Enforcement Division should not be Code 4rth quarter FY a dedicated exclusively to the weed abatement program. The Enforcement 2011-12 responsibility for inspecting the vacant properties should be Division yr assigned to the Code Compliance Officers in the beats or Manager m areas that these vacant properties are located. The E Division's information system should generate notices for rn the inspection of these vacant properties twice a year by the c Code Compliance Officers in whose beats or areas that M these properties are located. 118 To assure consistency in the delivery of the weed Code 4rth quarter FY abatement program by multiple Code Compliance Officers, Enforcement 2011-12 the Code Enforcement Division Manager should develop a Division formal written procedure for this program that describes how Manager these services will be delivered, and provide training to all of 2 the Code Compliance Officers in the procedure. This should L occur prior to the transfer of these responsibilities. v 119 The Code Compliance Officers should inspect these vacant Code 4rth quarter FY w properties on an ongoing basis for illegal dumping, growth of Enforcement 2011-12 high weeds, and other possible violations like any other Division N DrODerty in the City's neighborhoods. Manager 120 The responsibility for preparing and mailing Notices of Code 4rth quarter FY a Violation (or Notices to Clean Regrowth), and invoicing for Enforcement 2011-12 3 contractual weed abatement should be assigned to the Division N Code Compliance Processing Assistants. Manager 121 The Code Enforcement Division should utilize the Code Code 4rth quarter FY E Compliance Processing Assistants more effectively.This Enforcement 2011-12 should include paraprofessional responsibilities and tasks, Division not just clerical. This should include, at a minimum, much of Manager the work of the Code Compliance Officer(the preparing and o mailing Notices of Violation or Notices to Clean Regrowth '0 and invoicing for contractual weed abatement)and the preparation of warrant requests. 0 122 The Code Enforcement Division Manager should prepare a Code 1 at quarter FY v written procedure regarding preparation of warrant requests Enforcement 2012-13 E v in consultation with the Office of the City Attorney. Division Manager o 123 The Code Compliance Processing Assistants should be Code 1 st quarter FY w provided with training in the preparation of warrant requests Enforcement 2012-13 a a before these duties are transferred to the Code Compliance Division U Processin Assistants. Manager o 124 The Code Enforcement Division should develop a formal Code 1st quarter FY 5 written procedure regarding the application of penalties. Enforcement 2012-13 O m Division F Manager W M 125 The Code Enforcement Division Manager should work with Code 1 st quarter FY C the CDBG Coordinator in the City Manager's Office to Enforcement 2012-13 rn' develop a larger array of financial resources from CDBG Division ro funds available to the City to assist low and moderate- Manager m income homeowners rehabilitate their homes. v E U U Q Matrix Consulting Group Page 23 PacketPg. 684 CITY OF SAN BERNARDINO, CALIFORNIA Management Study of the Code Enforcement Division v v Rec. Timeline for No. Recommendation Responsibility Implementation U m 126 The Code Enforcement Division more effectively publicize Code 1st quarter FY $ the CDBG financial resources available to low and Enforcement 2012-13 `o moderate-income homeowners in need including publicizing Division a a these services on the Division's web site and in publications Manager develo ed bv the Division ur 127 The Code Enforcement Division should continue to work Code 3rd quarter FY w with CalTrans to beautify the entrances to the City i.e., Enforcement 2011-12 E freeway off ramps and on ramps. If necessary, the Division Division m should issue Notices of Violation to CalTrans for failure to Manager c meet oroDertv maintenance standards m 128 The Code Enforcement Division should continue to work Code 3rd quarter FY with local businesses to maintain compliance with property Enforcement 2011-12 maintenance standards. - Division Manager 129 The Code Enforcement Division Manager should deploy a Code 3rd quarter FY management style among his/her supervisory team that Enforcement 2011-12 fosters working with other City divisions and departments for Division 20 the betterment of the City. Manager 130 The Code Enforcement Division Manager should conduct Code 3rd quarter FY w periodic meetings with executive management of other City Enforcement 2011-12 departments to develop more effective working relationships Division N with these departments, the deployment of systems within Manager the Division for enhancing the working relationships with v these other City departments,and holding the staff of the ' Division accountable for working positively with these other yr City departments in the betterment of the City. v v 131 On-street parking enforcement should be the responsibility Code 1 at quarter FY v of the Police Department including 72-hour on street parking Enforcement 2012-13 violations. Division A Manager � 132 The Code Enforcement Division should continue to be Code 1 at quarter FY o responsible for the enforcement of property maintenance Enforcement 2012-13 '0 standards that govern parking on private property. Division Manager 0 133 This division of responsibility for on-street and off-street Code 1 at quarter FY a parking enforcement should be published on the Code Enforcement 2012-13 E Enforcement Division's and the Police Department's web Division u sites. Manager o 134 The Office of the City Clerk should bring the potential Code 4rth quarter FY w improvements in the lien process identified by the Business Enforcement 2011-12 9 Registration Manager in 2010 to the City Council for its Division o consideration. These recommendations would streamline Manager o the lien process, clarify the legal basis for a number of lien 5 D fees and work practices, etc. `m 135 The City should consider the centralization of responsibility City Clerk 4rth quarter FY E for the placement of liens on private property with the Office 2011-12 of the City Clerk. The Office of the City Clerk should work �c with the Code Enforcement Division and the Fire m Department to document the workload associated with this ro reassignment of responsibility,document the staffing m implications, if any, and bring this issue to the City Council for the consideration of the City Council. w E z U R Q Matrix Consulting Group Page 24 CITY OF SAN BERNARDINO, CALIFORNIA Management Study of the Code Enforcement Division V v Rec. Timeline for O No. Recommendation Responsibility Implementation U W 136 The Code Enforcement Division and the Office of the City Code 1 st quarter FY $ Attorney should work together to clarify those situations in Enforcement 2012-13 c which a 72-hour notice and a warrant is necessary based Division a v upon California case law. Manager i 137 The clarification of those situations that will require a 72- Code 1 at quarter FY N hour notice, an urgency warrant, an administrative Enforcement 2012-13 v inspection warrant, etc. should be integrated in the Division E development of a written procedure developed by the Code Manager ar Enforcement Division, in consultation with the Office of the c City Attorney, regarding the specific situations in which a 72- g hour notice will be given, an urgency warrant will be requested, an administrative inspection warrant will be requested, etc. 138 The City should allocate fifteen (15)Code Compliance Code 4rth quarter FY Officers, three(3) Code Compliance Supervisors, one(1) Enforcement 2011-12 Code Enforcement Division Manager, and three(3)Code Division 4 Compliance Processing Assistants to the Code Enforcement Manager A Division. 0 139 The City should reduce the extent of authorized staffing in Code 4rth quarter FY a the Code Enforcement Division,through attrition, by ten (10) Enforcement 2011-12 Code Compliance Officer positions,one (1)Code Division N Compliance Processing Assistant position, and one(1) Manager Code Compliance Supervisor position. (The Matrix v Consulting Group previously recommended the elimination of a second Code Compliance Supervisor position in recommendation#8) d E 0 m m c R c O A 0 G U E U U O C W U 0 O U O c v R c d m c n uJ m m c m E U U N Q Matrix Consulting Group Page 25 Packet Pg. 686 CITY OF SAN BERNARDINO, CALIFORNIA Management Study of the Code Enforcement Division m 2. PROFILE d This chapter presents a profile of the Code Enforcement Division. The profile e 0 9 includes the plan of organization, authorized levels of staffing, the municipal codes the y c staff of the Division are responsible for enforcing, and the workload and service levels. E d m 1. THE CODE ENFORCEMENT DIVISION IS AUTHORIZED A FISCAL YEAR @c 2011-12 BUDGET OF $3.3 MILLION 0 The exhibit following this page presents the fiscal year 2011-12 budgeted expenditures and revenues for the Code Enforcement Division. Important points to note 0 .N regarding the budgeted expenditures for the Division are presented below. 77% of the budget is allocated to salary and fringe benefit costs. C6 N • 6% of the budget is allocated to supplies largely postage, materials and supplies, r small tools and equipment, education and training, and printing charges. N • Almost 10% of the budget is allocated to contractual services including other d professional and landscape contracting. v m @ Almost 7% of the budget is allocated for internal service charges i.e., workers compensation, vehicle maintenance, etc. 0 N • Less than 1% of the budget is allocated to capital outlay. > c Also of note, 34% of the budget for the Division is funded through Community E v Development Block Grant funds. c c W Important points to note concerning fiscal year 2011-12 budgeted revenues are v 0 U presented below. 0 a The Division is budgeted to generate $2.6 million in revenue in fiscal year 2011- 12 (after adjusting downward the amount of Code Administration Civil penalty m revenue in the first half of this fiscal year). N The top four sources of revenue include Board Up / Demolition, Code m Administration Civil Penalty, Code Single-family Rental Inspection Fee (SFIF) and Code Administration Citation. v E L V z a Matrix Consulting Group Page 26 Packet Pg;687 8.A.a CITY OF SAN BERNARDINO, CALIFORNIA Management Study of the Code Enforcement Division m Exhibit 1 (1) 0 d r Fiscal Year 2011-12 Budgeted o Expenditures and Revenues ftal % of Total d Salaries Permanent/Full $1,055,600 $753,600 $1,809,200 E m Special Salaries $4,800 $4,200 $9,000 O1 m L Salaries Temporary/Part-Time $34,000 $- $34,000 � Overtime $4,000 $- $4,000 c PERS Retirement $268,100 $190,800 $458,900 Health and Life Insurance $132,500 $91,300 $223,800 Unemployment Insurance $3,700 $2,700 $6,400 Medicare $15,500 1 $10,900 $26,400 '0 N Sub-Total $1,518,200 $1,053,500 $2,571,700 77.0% Materials and Supplies $39,000 $- $39,000 N Small Tools and Equipment $14,100 $- $14,100 Advertising N , , T Dues and Subscriptions $5,200 $- $5,200 'O Mileage $1,400 $- $1,400 N © Meetings and Conferences $4,000 $- $4,000 Education and Training $14,700 $- $14,700 m m Rentals $900 $- $900 c n Equipment Maintenance $3,300 $- $3,300 c Printing Charges $28,500 $- $28,500 .2 4 Postage $66,800 $- $66,800 > Copy Machine Charges $8,100 $- $8,100 c Other Operating Expenses $7,100 $- $7,100 Sub-Total $199,200 $- $199,200 6.0% Other Professional $223,900 $- $223,900 w c Landscape Contract $29,200 $78,800 $108,000 w m Sub-Total $253,100 $78,800 $331,900 9.9% 0 Garage Charges $41,500 $- $41,500 °c Workers Compensation $11,700 $- $11,700 `o Liability $140,000 $- $140,000 Fleet Charges- Fuel $32,500 $- $32,500 m Sub-Total $225,700 $- $225,700 6.8% rn Computer Equipment $8,000 $- $8,000 m Miscellaneous Equipment $4,000 $- $4,000 °D Sub-Total $12,000 $- $12,000 0.4% c TOTAL $2,208,200 $1,132,300 $3,340,500 100.0% Matrix Consulting Group Page 27 Packet Pg. 688 8.A.a CITY OF SAN BERNARDINO, CALIFORNIA Management Study of the Code Enforcement Division d Exhibit 1 (2) u a L_ O T 'O 3 Unauthorized Signs $10,000 0.4% ur c Code Admininistration Citation $550,000 21.3% E Code Administration Civil d m Penalty $250,000 9.7% � Board up I Demolition $750,000 29.1% g Pendency Release $15,000 0.6% o Code Tow Release Fee w $5,000 0.2% Code SFIF k .2 600 000 ° -- $ 33 Administrative Citations SF $120,000 4.7% 0 Crime Free Rental $104,100 4.0% W Weed Abatement Des $175,000 6.8% TOTAL $2,579,100 100.0% N m N T a 3 N C E d D7 N C N C O MA D C d E m U O C W d a O U O c q FC G m C A V) M w C d E L U Q Matrix Consulting Group Page 28 Packet Pg.689 CITY OF SAN BERNARDINO, CALIFORNIA Management Study of the Code Enforcement Division m a 0 2. THE CODE ENFORCEMENT DIVISION IS AUTHORIZED THIRTY-FIVE d POSITIONS. `o r The table below presents a table reflecting the number of authorized positions for Vl the Code Enforcement Division for fiscal years 2009-10, 2010-11, and 2011-12. v E v rn 2009-00", ' , ;2010-41r :;A, c Administration 10 Code Enforcement Division Manager 1.00 1.00 1.00 c N Administrative Services Supervisor 1.00 1.00 - '^ Single Family Rental Inspection Administrative Assistant - 0.25 - c 0 Code Compliance Officer II 9.00 8.00 - 1° Code Compliance Processing Assistant 1.00 1.00 Senior Code Compliance Officer 1.00 1.00 r`+ Weed Abatement N Administrative Assistant - 0.25 T Code Compliance Officer II 1.00 1.00 - Weed Abatement Coordinator 1.00 1.00 - N c Enforcement I Beautification E E Administrative Assistant 1.00 0.50 m m Code Compliance Officer I 1.00 1.00 2.00 � Code Compliance Officer II 17.00 15.00 23.00 c Code Compliance Processing Assistant 3.00 3.00 4.00 °- An Senior Code Compliance Officer 1.00 1.00 2.00 > 0 Supervising Code Compliance Officer 3.00 3.00 3.00 Z Total Authorized Positions 41.00 38.00 35.00 E m U This information is based upon the City's adopted budget, and the funded / full-time 0 w positions as reflected for the Community Development Department. As the table notes, c U the staffing levels decreased somewhat from fiscal year 2009-10 to fiscal year 2011-12; S a R the number of authorized positions decreased from 41 positions to 35 positions or 15%. v m One of the positions that decreased, the Administrative Services Manager, was in fact rn transferred to Community Development Department Administration and not eliminated. c m E L U A Q Matrix Consulting Group Page 29 Packet Pg. 690 8.A.a CITY OF SAN BERNARDINO, CALIFORNIA Management Study of the Code Enforcement Division v 3. THE CODE ENFORCEMENT DIVISION USES A FUNCTIONAL PLAN OF o ORGANIZATION TO DEPLOY ITS STAFF. w L The plan of organization for the Code Enforcement Division is presented in the 0 v 3 exhibit following this page. Important points to note regarding the plan of organization y d are presented below. E rn • The "acting' Code Enforcement Division Manager is the manager of the division. The manager has four positions reporting to him: three (3) Code Compliance Supervisors and a Senior Code Compliance Officer. • One of the three Code Compliance Supervisors is assigned responsibility for the supervision of the Residential Enforcement program. The six (6) Code c Compliance Officers assigned to this program respond to complaints received by "- the Division regarding single-family residences. A Code Compliance Processing Assistant provides support to these staff. N C6 • One of the three Code Compliance Supervisors is assigned responsibility for the supervision of the Urgency Deployment, the Proactive Enforcement programs, a and coordination of volunteers for the Division. These programs are described ' below. c — The three (3) Code Compliance Officers assigned to the Urgency Deployment program are responsible for 72-hour health and safety violations i.e., sewage, weeds, excessive accumulation of trash and debris, etc. These three staff are assigned to residential health and safety o violations; staff assigned to commercial respond to commercial health and safety violations. The three (3) Code Compliance Officers assigned to the o Urgency Deployment program respond to complaints. d E The two (2) Code Compliance Officers assigned to the Proactive program are, at the present time, assisting the staff assigned to the Urgency Deployment program. The intent of the program is to conduct proactive w inspections based upon a number of factors such as areas with a higher g proportion of police and fire calls for service, foreclosures, etc. t' 0 c — The volunteer program consists of approximately twenty (20) volunteers A that will be utilized to conduct surveys of specific communities, identify d potential violations, and issue courtesy notices regarding these potential m violations. A Code Compliance Processing Assistant provides support to these staff. G d E L U A Q Matrix Consulting Group Page 30 Packe[Pg. 691 CITY OF SAN BERNARDINO, CALIFORNIA Management Study of the Code Enforcement Division m Exhibit 2 0 Existing Plan of Organization of the o Code Enforcement Division N C v E d rn A c m 0 N H c Code 0 Enforcement 4 Division 0 Manager(1) N Code Code Code Senior Code Senior Code Code n Compliance Compliance Compliance Compliance Compliance Compliance Supervisor(1) Supervisor(1) Supervisor(1) Officer(1) Officer(1) Processing ,o -Vacant Assistant(4) N Residential Urgency Single Famil Commercial Code Deployment Rental Code Code m Compliance Code Compliance Compliance E Officer II (6) Compliance Officer 0 Officer II (3) m Weed Proactive Rental Code Abatement c Enforcement Rental Code o Code Compliance Code 2 Com laince Officer II (1) Compliance > P Officer l l 11 (2) a Officer II (2) c Crime Free Cod E e Vehicle E m Compliance Abatement Officer II (1) Code o Compliance c Officer II (1) w m 0 0 O 0 c v `m c `v m c m m m m c v E t u A Q Matrix Consulting Group Page 31 Packet Pg.692 .. CITY OF SAN BERNARDINO, CALIFORNIA Management Study of the Code Enforcement Division m • One of the three Code Compliance Supervisors is assigned responsibility for the 0 supervision of the Single-Family Residential Rental Inspection program, Multi- r Family Residential Rental Inspection program, and the Crime-Free Multi-Housing program. These programs are described below. a a The single-family residential rental inspection program conducts annual y inspections of each single-family residential dwelling. There were d approximately 7,421 single-family residential rental dwellings in the City as E of the middle of August 2011. The scope of the program includes inspecting all exterior conditions of the single-family rental property to ensure it is in compliance with the City's ordinances. Interior inspections of the property can take place at the discretion of the code enforcement officer. The owner of a rental property pays a $100 annual inspection fee to the City. Well-maintained rental properties with no outstanding violations of any applicable laws may qualify to participate in the self- .2 certification program. Qualifying properties will not be subject to annual A inspections for a period of three years, provided the conditions of the it rental property do not deteriorate during that time to the point where the N rental property no longer meets eligibility standards for the program. N The Multi-Family Residential Rental program conducts annual inspections of each multi-family residential dwelling. There are approximately 864 multi-family residential rental dwellings in the City as of the middle of w August 2011. The scope of the program includes inspecting all exterior E conditions of the multi-family rental property to ensure it is in compliance m with the City's ordinances. The owner of a rental property pays a $100 annual inspection fee to the City. Well-maintained rental properties with no a outstanding violations of any applicable laws may qualify to participate in o the self-certification program. Qualifying properties will not be subject to annual inspections for a period of three years, provided the conditions of o the rental property do not deteriorate during that time to the point where v the rental property no longer meets eligibility standards for the program. E U — The Crime-Free Multi-Family Housing program is mandatory for all multi- 0 family (4 or more units) rental properties. The program consists of three W 0 phases: an 8-hour training class, inspection of the properties to verify o implementation of Crime Prevention through Environmental Design U 0 (CPTED) elements, maintenance of CPTED standards and active =_ participation in the Neighborhood Watch Program. The fees for the R program are as follows: v m subsequent fees rn 4 to 90 units $150 91 to 199 units $170 m m 200+units $185 c v A Code Compliance Processing Assistant provides support to these staff. a Matrix Consulting Group Page 32 Packet Pg. 693 CITY OF SAN BERNARDINO, CALIFORNIA Management Study of the Code Enforcement Division m 0 0 • The Senior Code Compliance Officer is assigned responsibility for supervision of d the Commercial Enforcement program, the Weed Abatement program, and the w Vehicle Abatement program. These programs are described below. 0 a 0 The three Code Compliance Officers assigned to the Commercial y enforcement program are each assigned to specific corridors. One Code Compliance Officer is assigned to Highland Avenue, Kendall Drive, E University Parkway, 40`h Street, E Street, north from Highland Avenue. The second Code Compliance Officer is assigned to Waterman Avenue, E Street south from Highland Avenue. The third Code Compliance Officer is assigned to Baseline Road, and Mount Vernon Avenue. These three Code N Compliance Officers respond to complaints and are proactive in identifying violations such as signs, property maintenance, zoning, home occupation permits, vacant lots in commercial corridors, etc. These three Code c Compliance Officers are also responsible for enforcement of compliance .4 with conditions of approval with conditional use permits. N — The two Code Compliance Officers assigned to the weed abatement program are responsible for the inspection of vacant lots twice a year to identify fire hazards in terms of dry grass, weeds, trash, and debris. The v property owners are notified of violations, and provided with the N opportunity to abate the violation. If a property is found to have a violation Z with no visible attempts for cleanup, the property is summarily abated via E a contractor retained by the Division. The property owner is then billed for rn the cost of abatement. c m — The vehicle abatement program is responsible for the enforcement of the o 72-hour on-street parking requirements. A Code Compliance Officer is .9 assigned to this program. 2 c A Code Compliance Processing Assistant provides support to these staff. E m v • The plan of organization includes the vacant Senior Code Compliance Officer. W Overall, the Code Enforcement Division is authorized thirty-five positions. g U 0 c `m c `m m c m V) m m c m E t U m Q Matrix Consulting Group Page 33 Packet Pg: 694 CITY OF SAN BERNARDINO, CALIFORNIA Management Study of the Code Enforcement Division m 4. THE CODE ENFORCEMENT DIVISION IS RESPONSIBLE FOR THE o ENFORCEMENT OF A NUMBER OF PROVISIONS OF THE MUNICIPAL d CODE. 0 T The Code Enforcement Division is responsible for the enforcement of a number N of the provisions in the City's Municipal Code. Examples of these provisions are d E d summarized in the table below. c m n 8.18 Accumulation Of Combustible And Noncombustible Materials 8.27 Nuisance 8.36 Abandoned Vehicles 8.38 Signs on Vacant Properties o 10.16 RV parking on unpaved surfaces m 12.44 Obstructions 15.24 Property Maintenance Requirements __ a 15.25 Rental Housing Program 15.26 Sin le-family Rental Propert Ins ection Pro ram N 15.27 Crime Free Rental Program 19.20 Fencing __ a 19.22 Signs 19.54 Home Occupation w 0 E Code enforcement cases originate in one of three ways: code violations observed by c Code Compliance Officers in the field, complaints received from other City departments r. c 0 and referred to the Division, and complaints received from residents or businesses. .n 0 5. OVERVIEW OF THE CODE ENFORCEMENT PROCESS. d E The Division uses GoEnforce software. GOEnforce is a hosted web-based 0 w c solution used to centrally manage code enforcement efforts. The centralized processing w d 0 0 of all cases offers the following features. GOEnforce consists of several components L) 0 c that work together: including: c • Case management including notifications and workflow that delivers reminders 0° and inspection sheets directly to staff's email boxes regarding follow-up dates, N automatic parcel lookup that retrieves parcel owner information based upon the to parcel address and automatically adds it to a case record for correspondence and action that automates the creation and tracking of all types of letters and c notices, etc.; a E L U 10 Q Matrix Consulting Group Page 34 Packet Pg:695 CITY OF SAN BERNARDINO, CALIFORNIA Management Study of the Code Enforcement Division m 0 0 A library of standard reports such as open versus closed cases by month, L interactive map plotting open cases, cases with overdue actions, etc.; `o T • A sophisticated toolset that integrates photos into the case management process; y d A Rental Inspection Management module that identifies rental properties and E facilitates management of the inspection process that automatically creates the necessary letters and notices, schedules inspections, and enables the management and recording of inspections and any violations identified in the 0 inspections; and A Weed Abatement Management module that enables the management of the inspection process and monitoring of repeat problem properties. `o_ .T Initial complaint information received by the Division is entered into the N GOEnforce by the Code Compliance Processing Assistants. The information entered N into GOEnforce includes the following: N Date the complaint is entered into GOEnforce; d E • The address of the complaint; c • The nature of the complaint; and 0 • The identity and phone number of the complainant. An 0 c 0 A physical file is not created for the case. All information is maintained in GOEnforce, E U including the investigation of the case and its resolution. w 0 Newly received complaints are routed to the Code Compliance Supervisor or the 'a 0 U 0 Senior Code Compliance Officer. The Code Compliance Supervisor or the Senior Code =_ 'v A Compliance Officer then assigns the case to an individual Code Compliance Officer for d m investigation and, if warranted, seeking compliance that potentially includes issuing a w Notice of Violation. Code Compliance Officers are responsible for the maintenance and d development of their assigned cases. As investigations proceed, case notes are E U N Q Matrix Consulting Group Page 35 Packet Pg.696 CITY OF SAN BERNARDINO, CALIFORNIA Management Study of the Code Enforcement Division v produced by the Code Compliance Officer using assigned notebook computers. The 0 01 notes are integrated into the GOEnforce software. Field investigations are conducted by 0 T Code Compliance Officers to (1) verify the existence and severity of the violation of the N Municipal Code, (2) document the violations for the record by means of notes entered m E v into GOEnforce via the notebook computer, photographs uploaded into GOEnforce via the notebook computer, and witness interviews entered into GOEnforce via the 0 N notebook computer. Code Compliance Officers can use a variety of tools to encourage a person `o .N .j against whom a complaint has been received to come into compliance. Many persons N will voluntarily comply with the Municipal Code as soon as the Code Compliance Officer N explains the violation and what's required for compliance. If this doesn't occur, the Code Compliance Officer can provide a verbal warning, a written warning, issue a Notice of d E Violation, or issue a citation. c As required by law, each person against whom a complaint has been received is M c 0 provided a written notice of the violation that describes the violation. The Code 0 Compliance Officer can also use a mobile printer to print the Notice of Violation in the E 0 field, and, upon return to the office, a Notice of Violation is also mailed to the person 0 c against whom a complaint has been received. 0 0 When voluntary compliance is not achieved, code enforcement violations are c c heard in a quasi-judicial proceeding held before an administrative hearing officer. The d administrative hearing officer, who is independent of the City, presides over a hearing. m c A N Based on the evidence presented, the administrative hearing officer determines m whether: d E r U A T; Q Matrix Consulting Group Page 36 PacketP� CITY OF SAN BERNARDINO, CALIFORNIA Management Study of the Code Enforcement Division v • The person is guilty of being a public nuisance or blight; 0 d An extension should be given to complete repairs; or `o • The case should be dismissed. N The City presents the evidence against the owner and neighbors are allowed to d E 0 offer testimony. The person against whom a complaint has been received has the right M to be represented by an attorney, present evidence, introduce witnesses, and question 0 N Code Compliance Officers under oath. The Administrative Hearing Officer will decide the disposition of the case at the .y hearing. If the person against whom a complaint has been received is declared guilty of N a Municipal Code violation, the Administrative Hearing Officer can issue a one-time fine. ;, N If the person against whom a complaint has been received does not correct the violation, liens in the amount listed on the judgment can be placed on the ad valorem d E tax bill for the property. c If the property is found to be a public nuisance, the City can remove the 2 C 0 violations at the owner's expense. 0 5. CODE ENFORCEMENT WORKLOAD AND SERVICE LEVELS d E The Code Enforcement Division provided workload data and service level data to 0 c the Matrix Consulting Group. This data was downloaded directly from the GOEnforce d 0 0 database maintained and updated by the Code Enforcement Division into an Excel o 0 spreadsheet. The analysis focused on the workload borne by the Code Enforcement d Officers. 00 c A ur As a consequence 2,059 cases that did not receive an inspection in the field m m were excluded from the analysis. These cases included single-family rentals that were E L V R Q Matrix Consulting Group Page 37 t3acket�g";,698 CITY OF SAN BERNARDINO, CALIFORNIA Management Study of the Code Enforcement Division a closes as "closed-not rental', closed with no inspection and no explanation for the 0 d inspection not being performed or with the cases being closed as "done" with no w 0 T inspection; commercial cases being closed as "closed-void", 'closed-unfounded", N "closed-ACP notice", etc.; building code violations closed with no inspection and d E m "closed-void", 'closed-unfounded", 'closed-refer", etc. Clearly, Code Compliance R Officers were closing cases with inadequate or any supervisory review and approval of 0 in n the basis for case closure. (1) The Code Enforcement Division Received and Inspected 14,136 Cases in o 2010. " v The table below presents the complaints received in 2010 by the Division. N m T` a of Vlolation J Number of Cases Building Code Violation 122 0.9% Commercial Enforcement 481 3.4% 3 Hazardous Condition 532 3.8% N Multi-Family Inspection 871 6.2% E Property Maintenance 2,464 17.4% Rental Inspection 8,547 60.5% c Sub-Standard Housing 195 1.4% Vehicle Abatement 924 6.5% o Grand Total 14,136 100.0% 'rn 2 0 Important points to note regarding the table are presented below. E E • Almost 67% of these cases pertained to single-family rental and multi-family $ rental inspections. C w A little more than 17% of these cases pertained to property maintenance. o U • Excluding rental inspections and multi-family inspections, the Division received °c 4,718 cases in 2010 or an average of 393 a month. `O m • This does not include weed abatement workload. Weed abatement workload is m not entered and monitored in the GOEnforce database; it is entered and A monitored in a separate legacy database. v' m Clearly, rental inspections and multi-family inspections comprise the largest proportion a E (67%) of the workload of the Code Enforcement Division. a Matrix Consulting Group Page 38 Packst Pg.699 CITY OF SAN BERNARDINO, CALIFORNIA Management Study of the Code Enforcement Division m (2) Almost all of the Cases That Were Opened in 2010 Were Closed By Mid- 0 August 2011. t The exhibit following this page presents the status of the cases opened in 2010 D 2 in terms of their status by the end of September 2011. Important points to note w m concerning the case are presented on the page following the exhibit. v s A • 98.3% of the cases that were opened in 2010 were closed by the end of September 2011. 0 n Almost 50% of the cases were closed by inspection (noted as "Closed — Inspection Done'). 0 O • A little more than 18% of the cases were closed as a result of the voluntary cooperation by the person about whom the complaint was made (noted as Closed —Voluntary"). N Almost 13% of the cases were indicated as simply closed (noted as "Closed"). T 'O • Almost 9% of the cases were closed as not rentals with almost all of these cases ' being rental inspections (noted as "Closed — Not Rental'). U' d E • Almost 7% of the cases were closed as unfounded (noted as "Closed — rn Unfounded"). • Of the 246 cases (or 1.7%) of all of the cases opened in 2010 that received a o field inspection) that were not closed in 2010, almost 25% were "open — citation", .T a little more than 30% were noted as "open" without any reason for still being o open, a little more than 15% were noted as 'open — request inspection", a little more than 8% were `open — extension", a little more than 9% were 'open — E appeal', and a little more 6% were 'open — hearing." 0 w C • The backlog of 246 cases is not significant. It represents a little less than the w 0 volume of one week of cases that were opened in 2010. However, it is o concerning that 29 hazardous condition cases remained open from 2010 by the u 0 end of September 2011, and that 10 building code violation and 13 sub-standard =_ housing cases remained open from 2010 by the end of September 2011. The number of cases is not significant; the severity of the violation is significant. m While the backlog of cases is not significant, the backlog of cases involving hazardous w conditions, building code violations, sub-standard housing is problematic. d E L u m Q Matrix Consulting Group Page 39 Packet Pg.700 [� UOi Sinaa] ZL-6Z-L Rpn3S luawa6eueW uOiSiniO 3uawaaJO;u3 apOO OuipJewag ueS- 88 auawgOej;y 0 n e IL m © Y NnnOOnin L(] W Mt0 O U d U 100 � N N � m � w � F mi �i v a x ° w T m?.. M M , N A , F- >1 a N 7 Q Vi 10 U CJ M W N ' M N O N N O ' N r ° OOi NN WM � NeD aD a0O N ' V t0 �O O N N oils I NO O N M M in _ T+ w N W 7 'E � u C N ' w 0 O O ' N N 'nN OO — ' I m tw m ,N in C O N O Z m K � O o 0 LU U; Q m O o Ol N M ' O i 0 N ' Y ' i ' M M ' �- N N C �, O « � Q O LU 9 C OI m W Q O N C C 7 � '0 C C m C ._�. Z C U m m ami 0 -6 `m Q m C C O O m 2 m » U O Qc m Qc m c m wTm c m c x e v c m wm c m 3 0t m c m: LL O c O o O O O SUDU U � UU d 0w 0 " 0 UUZUUUU U0OU U000 (p q 9 �k N c O"� CITY OF SAN BERNARDINO, CALIFORNIA Management Study of the Code Enforcement Division 0 Q (3) The Code Enforcement Workload Was Somewhat Seasonal in 2010. 0 d The chart below presents the cases that were opened in 2010. `o T 9 1,800 N 1,600 c 1,400 m rn 1,200 1,000 0 800 � 600 400 0 200 v a� a� c°r Q�� a� °tee �� y� oa� ,oar oa� •oar �aaJ aa`° QMe O°�O oaa� aoe� N 1< 9a � O T 9 As the chart indicates, the number of cases opened that received an inspection ur c v E declined particularly in January, September, October, and December relative to other rn m c months in 2010, but peaked in November. The peak in November was the result of the c 0 addition of more single-family rental inspections. A 0 (4) Workload Is Imbalanced Among the Code Compliance Officers. E The exhibit following this page presents the cases assigned to staff of the 0 Division in 2010. The exhibit presents this workload by type i.e., rental inspection and by m 0 v 0 staff of the Division. Important points to note concerning the exhibit are presented below 0 c and on the page following the exhibit. A c d Managers and supervisors were not assigned many cases in 2010. That is m appropriate. These staff should be managing and supervising the staff, the w workload, and level of service delivered by the Division. m • The workload allocation among Code Compliance Officers — in terms of cases assigned to these Code Compliance Officers — varied significantly from as much E as 1,748 cases for one Code Compliance Officer (mostly rental inspection cases) x a Matrix Consulting Group Page 41 Packet Pg,702 CITY OF SAN BERNARDINO, CALIFORNIA Management Study of the Code Enforcement Division m to as little as 1 case for another Code Compliance Officer. There is substantial imbalance in workload. r • Some of this is due to the work assignment of the Code Compliance Officer. A r Code Compliance Officer, for example, is assigned to the Crime-Free Multi- Family Housing program and would be impacted by the training requirements of w the program. However, in other instances, this variation would not appear d warranted. E v rn R • Another reason for some of this variance is that the two (2) Code Compliance Officers assigned to the weed abatement program do not utilize GOEnforce to track their workload, cases, actions taken to resolve cases, etc. These two (2) Code Compliance Officers decided not to utilize GOEnforce, but to utilize legacy software developed by the City for the weed abatement program. As a consequence, workload data regarding the two (2) Code Compliance Officers `o assigned to the weed abatement program was unavailable. An Ix v There is a significant imbalance of workload among Code Compliance Officers in terms N of cases assigned to staff of the Division in 2010. v (5) In a Little More than 58% of the Cases Opened in 2010, No Violations Were N Found. c v E More than one-half (58%) of the code enforcement cases opened in 2010 by the rn c Code Enforcement Division were found to have no violations. Important points to note 2 c 0 regarding the number of violations are presented below. 0 • In a little more than 58% of the cases that were opened in 2010, no violations 5 were found. v On the other hand, in a little more than 41% of the cases, multiple violations were 0 found. In a few cases, twenty (20) or more violations were found. w d 0 0 • For single family rental inspections, a little more than 62% of the inspections of c these types of cases found no violations. 'v M • For multiple-family inspections, a little more than 60% of the inspections of these types of cases found no violations. 00 c m N • For property maintenance cases, a little more than 41%% of the inspections of these types of cases found no violations. c E E t U A Q Matrix Consulting Group Page 42 Packet Pg. 703 4 uOisinaal Zt-R-6 ApOIS luawaBeueW UOi SIA Q luawaoJO;u3 apOO OUIPJEUJ89 ueS- gg :;uawyOe;ly a m o 4 r a m O N O N r M N M r Y 1 N M N M N N a U v {a r M iDM V M NrN NfO Ors V b m Q � J N o r mom O N M N r � a Q c o a O •- K .' Y c ' N N ' N . ' N W C N m 0 £ m2 E E c d �_ > N a i Q wN v ain in i°n � a n in in c Q p c W .6a w 4) Nm 0 V y Z 0 - 00 ' N 1� O C mU w m w O t0 t0 N n Q f O O v N N N V mom N N N V M ' N O D O N N t0 I w ' O N O MN n M N N M v n C O Z O C LC m z J faO Z�Q m LL rU.1 j V L V y rd E O O m c U W w O < c Z w' V.0 co w 0 0 45 U U K ¢ z J K O U O O O O W �0 C m I O q V 0 m mt � 0 IE 3 yzm m [� uOiSinaal A-R-L Rpn3S luowoBeueVj uOiSmi❑ IuOWaOJO;u3 apOO OuipJewag ueS- gg :3uawyoejjV w m o a � ao IL 1Nf� a v v O N y m m lm�l Y M t+q1 b N 01 M Q T A ^ ' M N I JQ r a !+ O Q ~ t W C N N O m N d d m w u E L d > d Q `m c as m m C 0 d O yZ c r rn r M m m M m m C d W d d C d c TU V dl N N M N M m m � `F ' N �mi f Q s m 3 N O N N m — m M N N C O A Z D _ Q N Z d � L OC J y� V 0 N O � m'Y ZO G� r m � E O c Z c c c c ~ m H N E m d o c r E " E ` d min d `m o 0 O rn S m = c t 3 > > x c 3 A d d '° d > > d c k vi > 3 E E ro CITY OF SAN BERNARDINO, CALIFORNIA Management Study of the Code Enforcement Division 0 a 0 The overwhelming number of single-family and multiple-family rental inspections t w found no violations. The first exhibit following this page presents the code enforcement 0 v cases that were opened in 2010, and the number of violations found in these cases rn c 0 (6) The Amount of Calendar Days Required to Close a Case and For the First E Site Visit Were Lengthy In Some Instances and Not In Others. The second exhibit following this page presents the amount of calendar days 0 N N required in 2010 for a first site visit and for case closure. This data is presented by type of case i.e., building code violation, commercial enforcement, etc. The amount of c A calendar days required for a first site visit and for case closure includes the average, N median, 25`h percentile, and 75`h percentile. This analysis excludes cases in which an N inspection did not occur and cases which were not closed in 2010. Important points to note regarding the exhibit are presented below. d E • Building Code Violation. At the median, it required 20 calendar days for the first site visit for a building code violation and 96 calendar days to close the case. Of note, however, it required an average of almost 74 calendar days for the first site E visit and almost 102 calendar days at the 751h percentile. o 0 Commercial Enforcement. At the median, it required 22 calendar days for the 'o first site visit for a commercial enforcement case and 36 calendar days to close E the case. E U Hazardous Condition. At the median, it required 7 calendar days for the first site visit for a hazardous condition case and 30 calendar days to close the case. Of v note, however, it required an average of 28 calendar days for the first site visit $ and almost 30 calendar days at the 75`h percentile. a c Multi-Family Inspection. This is a largely a proactive program. At the median, it A required 2 calendar days for the first site visit for a multi-family inspection case and 6 calendar days to close the case. 00 c m N f0 m c m E L U m x Q Matrix Consulting Group Page 45 Packet Pg.70& [L uOisinabl A-6Z-L RPn3S 3uewa6eueW uoisinip lu9wa3jo;u3 apOO OuipJewag ueS- 89 _luawyoenv R ° Q � a ,ro Ln d y .. a aeaeaaeo aeaeaeaeaee- e e o 0 o el o 0 o < ap (O W t0 O rD W N W M W O d d M N N O M M Cl! N A c0 IA N N O 7 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 O O 01 L � � 00mui ni .- 000 occ000 00000 0 x N 4 W A A yy N W W tp (O W M A M d f0 G d M M b V N V V y N N r M M N O W M N Y W W _R _0 0 Q W - - N - E 3 z W �O yN N mm M d N d W ' ra 16 W ED r Q N d ' N �j yy 0 N C O O W 'O d i0 f0 'n N N d M N N M n W d N d N M M — N Z C Q N — E z v O `o anov°Dir �nomMM � LL a _ C J w UN v O O Z U Ix a Q O z T Cc o w G m y Z C N W E O 0 Q m F a F Ui CITY OF SAN BERNARDINO, CALIFORNIA Management Study of the Code Enforcement Division m Exhibit 6 (1) v d L Calendar Days Required for the First o Inspection and For Case Closure N Building Code Violation Case Closure Calendar Days Average 140.4 E Median 95.5 d 16 Quartile 14.0 m 3` Quartile 252.5 1" Inspection Calendar Days .. Average 74.2 n Median 20.0 25th 1.0 75th 102.0 Commercial Enforcement Case Closure Calendar Days 2 Average 71.9 w Median 36.0 15 Quartile 16.0 n 3` Quartile 86.8 15 Inspection Calendar Days Average 43.7 a Median 22.0 25th 1.0 n 75th 61.0 c Hazardous Condition Case Closure Calendar Days £ Average 81.0 rn Median 30.0 1" Quartile 8.5 V Quartile 96.0 c 15 Inspection Calendar Days ° Average 27.9 > Median 7.0 25th 1.0 m 75th 30.0 y Multi-Family Inspection Case Closure Calendar Days Average 38.1 Median 6.0 w 1s Quartile 1.0 v V Quartile 42.0 1` Inspection Calendar Days c° Average 11.7 v Median 2.0 1" Quartile `w 3 Quartile 7.0 m c m ur m m c v E r U A Q Matrix Consulting Group Page 47 PackeYPg;,708 CITY OF SAN BERNARDINO, CALIFORNIA Management Study of the Code Enforcement Division ° �^ Exhibit 6 (1) u �✓ L Property Maintenance Case Closure Calendar Days Avera a 73.8 ° T Median 39.0 '0 3 1st Quartile 14.0 in 3rd Quartile 96.0 tat Inspection Calendar Days Average 43.5 d m Median 20.0 A c 1 at Quartile 5.0 3rd Quartile 54.0 Rental Inspection Case Closure Calendar Days Average 79.6 Median 35.0 ',. 1st Quartile 23.0 c 3rd Quartile 84.0 .y 1st Inspection Calendar Days .> Average 41.5 Median 23.0 1stQuartile 22.0 3rd Quartile 43.0 Substandard Housing Case Closure Calendar Days a Average 78.4 Median 44.0 © 1st Quartile 18.3 a v 3rd Quartile 98.8 E 1st Inspection Calendar Days Average 42.8 m Median 19.0 2 1st Quartile 1.5 C 0 3rd Quartile 49.5 A Vehicle Abatement Case Closure Calendar Days 0 Average 10.6 � Median 7.0 m 1st Quartile 5.0 v 3rd Quartile 12.3 0 1st Inspection Calendar Days c Average 0 Median 6.0 'O 0 1st Quartile 1.0 c) 3rd Quartile 9.0 9 C d m C R U) m M C d E z U m Q Matrix Consulting Group Page 48 Packet Pg. 709 CITY OF SAN BERNARDINO, CALIFORNIA Management Study of the Code Enforcement Division v o Important points to note regarding the exhibit are presented below. L • Building Code Violation. At the median, it required 20 calendar days for the first 46 site visit for a building code violation and 96 calendar days to close the case. Of note, however, it required an average of almost 74 calendar days for the first site in visit and almost 102 calendar days at the 75'" percentile. E d • Property Maintenance. At the median, it required 20 calendar days for the first site visit for property maintenance case and 39 calendar days to close the case. Of note, however, it required an average of almost 44 calendar days for the first site visit and 54 calendar days at the 75th percentile. • Rental Inspection. This is a largely a proactive program that involves sending a letter to the single-family rental owner or manager approximately three weeks in o advance of the inspection. At the median, it required 23 calendar days for the first .� site visit for a rental inspection case and 35 calendar days to close the case. N • Sub-Standard Housing. At the median, it required 19 calendar days for the first site visit for a sub-standard housing case and almost 44 calendar days to close N the case. Of note, however, it required an avers a of almost 43 calendar days for v the first site visit and 50 calendar days at the 75 percentile. rn c • Vehicle Abatement. At the median, it required 6 calendar days for the first site E visit for a vehicle abatement case, and almost 7 calendar days to close the case. A _ Altogether, the level of service meets some of the metrics used by the Matrix Consulting 2 _ 0 Group, but largely exceeds the benchmarks for 1st site visit and case closure in most 0 instances. d E (7) Almost 75% of the Code Enforcement Cases That Were Closed in 2010 Without an Inspection Were Single-Family Rental Inspections. w v There were a total of 2,059 cases in 2010 that were closed without an inspection. g U 0 These cases are presented by type in the table below. v A _ d m Building Code Violation 17 0.6% _ m Commercial Enforcement 39 1.9% w Hazardous Condition 61 3.0% m m Multi-Family Inspection 14 0.7% Property Maintenance 294 14.3% °1 --- E Rental Inspection 1,542 74.9% v m a Matrix Consulting Group Page 49 PackefPy:710 CITY OF SAN BERNARDINO, CALIFORNIA Management Study of the Code Enforcement Division v 0 0 U Sub-Standard Housing 63 3.1% t Vehicle Abatement 29 1.4% e Total 2,059 100% a 2 to In some instances, not conducting inspections appears warranted. For example, d E in 47% of the cases that were not inspected, it was determined that the single-family rn m c M property was not a rental property. 0 In other instances, the basis for closing these cases without an inspection was not clear. For example, in 11% of the cases, the cases were noted as "closed". In 24% 0 Mn of the cases, the cases were noted as "done". It is unclear how the cases could be it considered "done' or "closed" without an inspection in the field to determine the validity C6 N of the alleged violation. v 0 6. THE CODE ENFORCEMENT DIVISION IN SAN BERNARDINO FACES A in GREATER NUMBER OF CHALLENGES THAN OTHER NEIGHBORING v CITIES. E d m R The analysis of workload and service levels in San Bernardino needs to consider the economic challenges that its residents face vis-a-vis other surrounding cities. This is 2 clearly evident in the exhibit at the end of this chapter. Important points to note ° v regarding the data are presented below. `o w • Economic data was collected from eight (8) other cities in San Bernardino and w Riverside counties with a population of not less than 100,000 and compared to v San Bernardino. o U O C The data collected for these eight (8) other cities included population, a unemployment, median household income, percentage of households with cash public assistance income, percentage of households with food stamp / SNAP m benefits in the last twelve months, and the percentage of families with income below the poverty level in the last twelve months. w m The financial data was obtained from the United States Census Bureau American Fact Finder and represents data for 2009. E E O Q Matrix Consulting Group Page 50 �PacketPg:771 8.A.a CITY OF SAN BERNARDINO, CALIFORNIA Management Study of the Code Enforcement Division v • The percentage of the civilian labor force that is unemployed in San Bernardino 0 is higher than four (4) other cities, but lower than four (4) others including Rialto, t Victorville, Moreno Valley and Ontario. `o T • The median household income in San Bernardino is lower than any of these eight (8) other cities. U) v • The percentage of households with cash public assistance income is higher in E San Bernardino than any other city except Victorville. A • The percentage of households with food stamps / SNAP benefits in the last twelve months is higher in San Bernardino than any other city except Victorville. • The percentage of households with incomes below the poverty level in the last twelve months is higher in San Bernardino than any of these eight (8) other cities. `o .2 This data is relevant to code enforcement simply because it indicates that households in N San Bernardino will have greater difficulty with property maintenance and correcting C6 N violations than other households in these ten other cities. a a N c *'^ E rn c m c 0 N 0 C 0 E m u `o `c W v 0 0 U 0 c v c `w m c m ul tll ro c u E t U Matrix Consulting Group Page 51 Packet Pg. 712 [� uoaSIAObl ZL-6Z-L APniS Luawa6euew uOiSinip luawOOJO;u3 apOO Ou'WuJag ueS- gg :auawgOeAy Ch M R A Q o.L d Y L+ N W N m m N V N M V MO M 0 y - Q L C E mJL N IA 666 ' C6 N N � x > 00 .m a (L 0 Y W O U LL t 3: .E 2 c o ° mN -0 '00 3m > L •cn L M N W c0 . 06 A N m N E m � Nn R � 7AOl 06 6 06 o D R N L f0 � 6 N m m 0 l0 y O Q C f6 0 0 Z ,- 0 W R ^ moo °n 'co a �i � O d N m N O Q 3 R y U O O Ot ¢ c LLB C/) 3 W 0 .- A � N A N N c0 W C N Oi t7N W HNLdm0 O Y D h V t vt 0 m0i (/� A O m M A A R N N i0 N N .� U 0 M (A fA f9 f9 f9 f9 f9 1A © N CQ. rL = C C y QO U aoeego0 ee y N O N O a M ' N <O w C OhN � W t7N07f- O VI � j m O j C o Q m M M M OAf LO N O O N O O N 0. i0 C A V OHO 7m) ON QW j N N O O A W W U m O D O. Q V O p L N it O Z T W ui a [0 y m 0 Im aO c 0 c � ° Z U _ k N N O m N R � 0 p Uf NUFdROmu_ > � CITY OF SAN BERNARDINO, CALIFORNIA Management Study of the Code Enforcement Division m v 3. COMPARATIVE SURVEY v t As part of the management study of the Code Enforcement Division, the Matrix a T 9 Consulting Group conducted a comparative survey of seven (7) other cities to elicit n workload, program, and staffing levels for code enforcement in these cities. These E m cities included Pasadena, Riverside, Ontario, Moreno Valley, Pomona, Santa Ana, and Fontana. c N N 1. THE 2010 POPULATION OF THE SEVEN CITIES USED FOR COMPARISON VARIED FROM 151,376 TO 357,754. c y The table below presents the estimated 2010 population for the seven cities that rr were included in the comparative survey and for San Bernardino. N city Estimated 2010 Population _. v Pasadena 151,576 ur Pomona 163,683 c Ontario 174,536 E Moreno Valley 188,357 Fontana 190,356 `m San Bernardino 204,800 c Riverside 304,051 °- .y Santa Ana 357,754 0 c The population in San Bernardino is the third largest in comparison to these £ E U seven (7) other cities. only Riverside and Santa Ana have larger populations. This w c w population data is provided by the State Department of Finance. o U These cities were used for purposes of comparison based upon comparable 'v population, location in the southern California, the diversity of economics of their d m residents, or the overall age of their housing. U) m c v E L U A Q Matrix Consulting Group Page 53 PacketPg.714i-. 8.A.a i CITY OF SAN BERNARDINO,CALIFORNIA Management Study of the Code Enforcement Division m 2. THE CODE ENFORCEMENT FUNCTIONS IN FIVE OF THESE SEVEN o OTHER CITIES WERE ESTABLISHED AS A DIVISION IN A COMMUNITY s DEVELOPMENT OR PLANNING DEPARTMENT. `o T The table below presents the organizational location of the Code Enforcement in Division in each of these seven cities and for San Bernardino v coons Inct' °1 m n De artmen M Fontana Police Field Services (Investigation, Traffic), Patrol, Special Services .°n (Animal Control, Narcotics, w Emergency Services, Code Enforcement,etc. Moreno Valley Community and Economic Building and Safety, Planning, u Development Code Enforcement, » Redevelopment, Housingd Ontario Housing Housing, Code Enforcement Pasadena Planning Planning, Building and Safety, Code Enforcement, Cultural a, Affairs Pomona Community Development Planning, Building and Safety, a Code Enforcement, Housing Riverside Community Development Planning, Building and Safety, m Code Enforcement, Historical Resources E San Bernardino Community Development Planning, Building and Safety, rn Code Enforcement Santa Ana Community Development Planning, Building and Safety, m Code Enforcement 0 2 Important points to note regarding the organizational location are presented 0 c below the table. E E v • None of these seven comparable cities besides San Bernardino have currently w organized Code Enforcement as a separate department. In each and every case, w Code Enforcement is a division or a section within a department. San a Bernardino has, in the past, organized Code Enforcement as a separate 0 department, but does not at the present. 0 v • In five of the seven cities, Code Enforcement is organized as part of the c Community Development Department or the Planning Department. This m includes the cities of Moreno Valley, Pasadena, Pomona, Riverside, and Santa Ana have organized Code Enforcement as a division within their Community u Development Department or the Planning Department. Ca • In Fontana, Code Enforcement is organized within the Police Department. Code e Enforcement does not report to the Police Chief; it reports to a manager who A a Matrix Consulting Group Page 54 ' PacketPg. 715 CITY OF SAN BERNARDINO, CALIFORNIA Management Study of the Code Enforcement Division a reports to the Police Chief. Code Enforcement is part of the Special Services 0 Division that includes Animal Control, Narcotics, Emergency Services, etc. t w • In Ontario, Code Enforcement is organized as part of the Housing Department. a 0 Overall, Code Enforcement is more often than not organized as part of the N c m Community Development Department or the Planning Department in these comparable E m R cities. In fact, a 2009 survey by CACEO of its membership reported that 71.8% of the respondents work under the Community Development and / or Building and Planning departments. 0 0 3. THE LEVEL OF STAFFING FOR SAN BERNARDINO EXCEEDS THAT OF .n THESE OTHER SEVEN CITIES. N The table below presents a comparison of authorized staffing for Code ;, N Enforcement for these seven comparable cities and for San Bernardino. y Pasadena m Managers 1 1 2 1 1 0 1 1 E supervisors 0 4 5 0 2 1 0 5 m officers 8 14 11 15 6 15 9 25 Clerical 3 6 5 3 2 3 1 4 m TOTAL 12 25 23 19 11 19 11 35 a 1,000 Population I 12,631 12,162 7,589 9,914 14,880 18,829 17,305 5,651 T Position O c Important points to note regarding the level of authorized staffing for each of a U these comparable cities and San Bernardino are presented below. 4 W San Bernardino has a higher level of staffing for code enforcement than the o other seven comparable cities in terms of the ratio of population per code Q enforcement position. oc D A The level of staffing within San Bernardino is a little more than twice the average E and the median of these seven other cities in terms of the ratio of population per m" code enforcement position. rn In fact, not one of these other seven cities has as high a proportion of code enforcement staffing as San Bernardino in terms of the ratio of population per code enforcement position. E E U A 1r Q Matrix Consulting Group Page 55 PackefPg:716 8.A.a CITY OF SAN BERNARDINO, CALIFORNIA Management Study of the Code Enforcement Division v Overall, the extent of authorized positions for Code Enforcement is much higher 0 than the pattern found in these other seven cities. `o T 4. THE NUMBER OF CODE ENFORCEMENT CASES WITHIN SAN BERNARDINO WAS SLIGHTLY LESS THAN THE MEDIAN OF THESE rn OTHER SEVEN CITIES. v E m The table below presents a comparison of the number of cases that were opened per 1,000 population in 2010-11 for Code Enforcement for these seven 0 N comparable cities and for San Bernardino. — 0 Mn Code v Enforcement � ! Cases 2,700 11,888 3,495 4,631 4,208 7,900 6,066 4,718 JJ Opened In 2010-11 r Cases Per 1,000 17.81 39.10 20.02 24.59 25.71 22.08 31.88 23.04 Population N I Important points to note regarding the data contained within the table are E E presented below. • The number of cases exclude multi-family and single-family rental inspections o for all of the cities and for San Bernardino. .2 • The number of cases opened in 2010-11 in San Bernardino per 1,000 population were somewhat less than these seven other cities. The number of E cases opened in San Bernardino per 1,000 population was 11% less at the average and 6% less at the median than these other seven cities. w c w • The number of cases per 1,000 population is fifth highest in comparison to these o seven other cities. Riverside, Fontana, Pomona, and Moreno Valley have a u higher number of cases opened per 1,000 population than San Bernardino. 0 Santa Ana, Ontario, and Pasadena have a lower number of cases opened per 1,000 population than San Bernardino. d m Overall, the number of cases opened in 2010-11 in San Bernardino is slightly less than R N the median of these seven other cities. m d E S Q Matrix Consulting Group Page 56 PacketPg. 777 S.A.a CITY OF SAN BERNARDINO, CALIFORNIA Management Study of the Code Enforcement Division m 5. SAN BERNARDINO HAS AN EXPANSIVE PROGRAM OF CODE o ENFORCEMENT. w s The table below presents a comparison of the key aspects of the code 0 a enforcement programs in these seven other cities and San Bernardino. ffi c v E d rn m Weed No Yes No No Yes No Yes Yes m abatement Ordinance? 72-Hour No No No Yes No No Yes Yes Parking Violation Ordinance? Property Yes Yes Yes Yes Yes Yes Yes Yes Maintenance o Ordi N nance? Single-family Yes No Yes No No Yes No Yes rental inspection Ordinance? m l Multi-Family Yes No Yes No No Yes No Yes N rental inspection -a Ordinance? Sign Yes Yes Yes Yes Yes Yes Yes Yes in Ordinance? © Dangerous Yes Yes Yes No Yes Yes Yes Yes m Buildings? E m m C Important points to note regarding the data contained in the table are presented below. 0 • The Code Enforcement Division in San Bernardino provides an expansive program that includes weed abatement, 72-hour parking enforcement, property o maintenance, single-family rental inspection, multi-family rental inspection, sign, and dangerous buildings. E E U • Only three (3) of the other seven (7) cities provide a weed abatement program w within Code Enforcement. It is not unusual for a Fire Department to provide such W a program within their Fire Prevention Division. v 0 U • Only two (2) of the of the other seven (7) cities provide a 72-hour parking 0 violation program within Code Enforcement. It is not unusual for a Police Department to provide such a program as part of their parking enforcement program. m r= • All of the seven (7) cities provide a property maintenance program within code v enforcement. n d E U U A Q Matrix Consulting Group Page 57 Packet Pg.718 S.A.a CITY OF SAN BERNARDINO, CALIFORNIA Management Study of the Code Enforcement Division m Three (3) of the cities provide a single-family rental inspection program within v code enforcement, although Pasadena provides such a program as part of a broader inspection of all single family residences at escrow. 0 T • Three (3) of the cities provide a multi-family rental inspection program within code enforcement. y d • All of the seven (7) cities provide a sign program within code enforcement. E :r • Six of the seven (7) cities provide a dangerous building program within code enforcement. 0 N N Overall, San Bernardino provides an expansive program of code enforcement. 6. SAN BERNARDINO PROVIDES A LOWER LEVEL OF PROACTIVE o ENFORCEMENT THAN THREE OF THE OTHER SEVEN CITIES. A a Traditionally, Code Enforcement in cities operates largely on a complaint-driven N A basis, with limited opportunities to provide door-to-door inspections. However, as the r T 9 table below indicates, some of the cities included in the comparative survey have y Q developed extensive programs of proactive enforcement. v m $an c m na � Proportion Unknown 40% 0% 3% 33% 40% 15% 19% c (%)of code enforcement '—" cases that are proactive c v Important points to note regarding proactive code enforcement by these seven (7) E E U O w cities and by San Bernardino are presented below. w` d v • Pasadena did not know what proportion of their code enforcement cases were v proactive versus reactive. 0 • Three (3) cities had extensive levels of proactive code enforcement in terms of c the proportion of their code enforcement cases were proactive versus reactive. m This included Riverside, Pomona, and Santa Ana. In these three (3) cities, proactive cases ranged from 33% to 40% of the total cases. rn to • Three (3) cites had low levels of proactive code enforcement including San Bernardino, Fontana, and Moreno Valley. In these three (3) cities, proactive v cases ranged from 3% to 19% of the total cases. a Matrix Consulting Group Page 58 Packet Pg.719 CITY OF SAN BERNARDINO, CALIFORNIA Management Study of the Code Enforcement Division 0 0 0 Overall, the proportion of proactive enforcement in San Bernardino represents a L lower proportion of the total caseload compared to Riverside, Pomona, and Santa Ana, 0 9 but more than Ontario, Moreno Valley, and Fontana. As noted later in this report, w Z 0 proactive enforcement is a best practice for code enforcement. Instead of only pursuing v rn A violations on a complaint-driven, reactive basis, a best practice is to create an effective targeting strategy for enforcement that complements responses to complaints.' 7. ALMOST ALL OF THE SEVEN CITIES USE THEIR AUTOMATED PERMITTING SOFTWARE TO FACILITATE THE MANAGEMENT OF CODE `o ENFORCEMENT SERVICE DELIVERY. .y d c Each and every city in this comparative survey is utilizing an automated w o information system to track and facilitate the management of delivery of code T V enforcement services. However, almost all of these cities are utilizing different systems N as the table below indicates. E m m Moreno Santa San m Pasadena Riverside .Ontario Valley Pomona I Ana Fontana Bernardino. r0o Whatkind of Tidemark GoEnforce CityView Permits Comcate SAPIN Trakll and GoEnforce software tloes Plus Tidemark Code G Enforcement y use for its 'p case management m E 0 Important points to note regarding the automated permit information systems is e u presented below. a 0 O Four of these cities are utilizing their automated permit information systems with c linkage to building and planning permits. This is logical, since problems with a code enforcement violations may necessitate actions with building and planning permits. All of these systems are commercial off-the-shelf systems. v m s_ • Riverside, Pomona and San Bernardino are utilizing automated information in systems developed exclusively for code enforcement: GOEnforce. Pomona is m m c d ' Mallach, Alan, Bringing Buildings Back: From Abandoned Properties to Community Assets (National E Housing Institute 2006) Q Matrix Consulting Group Page 59 Packet Pg.720,;. CITY OF SAN BERNARDINO, CALIFORNIA Management Study of the Code Enforcement Division m using Comcate that includes software for code enforcement, rental inspection, foreclosure enforcement, and citizen mobile access. L w Santa Ana is using a system that was developed in-house. 0 a The effective use of automated information systems is essential to the effective n d management of service delivery for code enforcement. Indeed, the Code Enforcement v rn R Division in San Bernardino has abundant data concerning its service delivery due to the use of GOEnforce, with the exception of the weed abatement program. The use of N an information system for code enforcement is a best practice. A property information 0 0 system that provides current and comprehensive information about properties is a A d critical part of any effective abandoned and blighted property initiative. Cities can then N o� use this data to target resources to the areas in the need of most attention 2 T V 8. TWO OF THE SEVEN CITIES HAVE ESTABLISHED SINGLE-FAMILY AND MULTI-FAMILY RENTAL INSPECTION PROGRAMS. m Two cities — Ontario and Santa Ana — have established single-family and multi- family rental inspection programs. One city — Pasadena — inspects all single-family 2 c 0 homes at sale during escrow. This includes single-family rentals. Pasadena inspects 0 multi-family rentals. v E The cities of Riverside, Moreno Valley, Pomona, and Fontana do not have 0 w c single-family or multi-family rental inspection programs. m v a 0 Important points to note regarding the single-family and multi-family rental U 0 c inspection programs in Ontario, Pasadena, and Santa Ana are noted below. c `0 Ontario and Santa Ana inspect the exterior and the interior of single-family and m multi-family rentals. San Bernardino only inspects the exteriors of single-family w rentals. The Code Enforcement Division does not inspect the interior of multi- family rentals; the Fire Prevention Bureau, Fire Department, inspects the c d z University of Texas School of Law, Community Development Clinic, Building Hope: Tools for E Transforming Abandoned and Blighted Properties into Community Assets, December 2007 Q Matrix Consulting Group Page 60 Packet Pg.721 8.A.a CITY OF SAN BERNARDINO, CALIFORNIA Management Study of the Code Enforcement Division m interiors of multi-family rentals. Pasadena inspects the interior and the exterior o of multi-family rentals, and single-family residences at sale during escrow L)„ L • Ontario and Santa Ana inspect single-family rentals on a cycle of once every 0 four years. San Bernardino inspects single-family rentals on a cycle of once annually. N v • Ontario, Pasadena, and Santa Ana inspect multi-family rentals on a cycle of E once every four years. San Bernardino inspects multi-family rentals on a cycle of once annually. A high proportion of San Bernardino's housing stock is rental. In fact, 49.7% of N the housing units in San Bernardino in 2010 were rental units based on data provided a by the United States Census Bureau. Inspection of single-family and multi-family v c rentals is a best practice for those cities in which a high proportion of their housing N C6 stock is single family or multi-family rentals 3 Cities have had success with registration N T 9 systems, which require landlords to register their rental properties, provide contact y information for a central database, and obtain licensing or occupancy permits. Rental m registration also provides cities with expanded opportunities to inspect the property and A educate owners about their responsibilities as property owners and landlords. o y However, San Bernardino is inspecting its single family and multi-family rentals o more frequently than Ontario, Pasadena, and Santa Ana: once every year versus once E U every four years. In addition, San Bernardino is only inspecting the exterior of single- 2 w v family rentals (unless appearances warrant an inspection of the interior) whereas g U Ontario and Santa Ana inspect the exterior and the interior. This is NOT to suggest that o v M San Bernardino should inspect the interior of single family and multi-family rentals. m m c v C 3 University of Texas School of Law, Community Development Clinic, Building Hope: Tools for E Transforming Abandoned and Blighted Properties into Community Assets, December 2007 m a Matrix Consulting Group Page 61 Packet Pg. 722 CITY OF SAN BERNARDINO, CALIFORNIA Management Study of the Code Enforcement Division v 9. THREE CITIES HAVE ADOPTED FORECLOSURE ORDINANCES. 0 d Vacant properties inflict problems on communities. They harbor crime, weaken w 0 T surrounding property values, and create special maintenance challenges. The recent U) surge of mortgage foreclosures has contributed to an even greater proliferation of y0 E m vacant properties and the problems that come with them.4 A Three of the seven cities included in the comparative survey have adopted 0 n n foreclosure ordinances to address this challenge. This includes the cities of Riverside, Ontario, and Santa Ana. Important points to note regarding these programs are `o .2 presented below. N Riverside and Santa Ana have adapted foreclosure ordinances that hold titleholders accountable for the upkeep of residential properties while they are N vacant. r Ontario adapted a more comprehensive foreclosure ordinance that (1) includes w a requirement to register properties with the City if these properties are vacant £ and abandoned, (2) holds titleholders accountable for the upkeep of residential m properties while they are vacant, and (3) requires mortgage companies are also required to hire a local company to inspect the property on a weekly basis. 0 0 San Bernardino has not adopted a foreclosure ordinance. The San Bernardino 2A 2 0 Economic Development Agency noted in its Neighborhood Stabilization Program Three E grant application that of the 200 neighborhoods identified in the United States 0 w c Department of Housing and Urban Development's (HUD) database as being w v 0 0 completely within the boundaries of the City of San Bernardino, 89.5% received a c c score indicating the greatest need for foreclosure relief according to HUD's scoring d system. The grant application further noted that, in November of 2010, the City of San m m N Bernardino had a foreclosure rate approximately three times the rate for the country as m m ° University of Texas School of Law, Community Development Clinic, Texas Problem Properties Toolkit: m A Resource To help Texas Communities Address Problems Created by Vacant and Abandoned E Properties, 2010 Q Matrix Consulting Group Page 62 Packet Pg..723 , CITY OF SAN BERNARDINO, CALIFORNIA Management Study of the Code Enforcement Division v a whole and one and one-half times the rate for the state of California.5 Some of the �.. city's neighborhoods have substantial problems with foreclosure. For example, the 0 T neighborhood at the intersection of Baseline and Waterman Avenue has 3,027 housing rn units and of these, approximately 27 percent are in foreclosure or are 90 days or more delinquent. R 10. MOST OF THE SEVEN CITIES ASSIGN THEIR CODE ENFORCEMENT OFFICERS SOLELY TO GEOGRAPHICAL AREAS. N San Bernardino allocates its Code Compliance Officers to functional ;7 C 0 assignments. For example, Code Compliance Officers are assigned specifically to d o- weed abatement, 72-hour parking violations, residential, commercial, etc. N Not one of the seven cities included in the comparative survey chose to allocate T their code enforcement officers on a functional basis like San Bernardino as noted u, c (^ below. E • Pasadena, Moreno Valley, Pomona, and Fontana allocate their code enforcement staff on a geographic basis. c 0 • Riverside, Ontario and Santa Ana allocate their code enforcement staff on a geographic and a functional basis. Ontario allocates their code enforcement o staff on a geographic basis except for those staff assigned to single-family rental inspections. Riverside allocates code enforcement staff geographically except E for those staff assigned to weed abatement, vacant houses, illegal group homes, and abandoned vehicle abatement that work citywide. w w Unlike these other seven cities, San Bernardino allocates its code enforcement o U 0 staff solely to functional assignments. Best practices for code enforcement suggest a m assigning code enforcement officers to geographic areas ("beat cop model"), as m opposed to cases ("detective model"), which provides for accountability and allows N code enforcement officers to become active and knowledgeable about their geographic d s San Bernardino Economic Development Agency, Neighborhood Stabilization Program Three, E © Substantial Amendment to the Consolidated Annual Action Plan for Fiscal Year 2010-11, March 2011 L U Q Matrix Consulting Group Page 63 Packet Pg. 724 w CITY OF SAN BERNARDINO, CALIFORNIA Management Study of the Code Enforcement Division m Oassignment, form partnerships with neighborhood groups, and identify problem 0 neighborhood and properties s `0 T 11. THERE ARE VARIATIONS AMONG THE SEVEN CITIES REGARDING UNIFORMS, BADGES, CACEO CERTIFICATION, AND WEEKEND n COVERAGE. m E m Three questions within the comparative survey addressed whether code A enforcement staff wear uniforms, carry badges, cover weekends, and are required to 0 have California Association of Code Enforcement Officers (CACEO) certification. The responses by the seven cities to these questions are presented below. o A • Three cities require their code enforcement officers to wear uniforms i.e., polo shirts with City emblems on the shirts. This includes Riverside, Ontario, and N Pomona. Pasadena, Moreno Valley, Santa Ana, and Fontana do not require their code enforcement officers to wear uniforms. San Bernardino requires their code enforcement offices to wear uniforms. 3 • Six cities require their code enforcement offices to carry badges. This includes i Pasadena, Riverside, Ontario, Moreno Valley, Santa Ana, and Fontana. Only E Pomona does not require code enforcement officers to carry badges. San Bernardino requires code enforcement officers to carry badges. • Three cities require CACEO certification by their code enforcement officers: o Pomona, Santa Ana, and Fontana. Four cities do not require certification: Pasadena, Riverside, Ontario, and Moreno Valley. San Bernardino does not o require CACEO certification. CACEO is the only organization in the state that d will certify a code enforcement officer. A 2009 survey of CACEO membership reported that 22% of the respondent's employers requires completion of all three CACEO certificates (basic, intermediate, and advanced). In addition, it is important to note that a Code Compliance Officer from San Bernardino serves u as a regional representative (Region 6)for CACEO: Ms. Carrie Rios. o U 0 • Only one city does not schedule code enforcement officer(s) to work weekends: Santa Ana. Ontario sometimes schedules code enforcement officers to work weekends. The other five cities schedule code enforcement officer(s) to work weekends including Pasadena, Riverside, Moreno Valley, Pomona, and m Fontana. San Bernardino schedules a code enforcement officer to work N weekends, albeit a part-time code enforcement officer. m C d 6 Frank C. Bracco, Clayton Archway Partnership. An Incremental Approach to Improving Code E Enforcement and Compliance in Clayton County, Georgia, February 2010 m 4 Matrix Consulting Group Page 64 B.A.a CITY OF SAN BERNARDINO, CALIFORNIA Management Study of the Code Enforcement Division v Overall, the approaches used by San Bernardino in regards to uniforms, badges, and 0 d weekend coverage are not unlike the patterns found in many of these seven other `o T cities. 3 in c E E v rn m c m 0 N c 0 N d N T N T 'O 3 N C d E d O1 10 C 10 C O 2 C d E d O O C W d a O U O c 0 `m c `m t0 c m N 03 m c d E L U A Q Matrix Consulting Group Page 65 Packet ft 726 ': CITY OF SAN BERNARDINO, CALIFORNIA Management Study of the Code Enforcement Division 0 4. CUSTOMER FEEDBACK d t As part of the management study of the Code Enforcement Division, the Matrix c 0 4 Consulting Group met with and interviewed a number of customers of the services y c provided by the Division. This included representatives of the Del Rosa Neighborhood E rn Action Group, the Wildwood Neighborhood Association, the NENA Neighborhood Association, the Arrowview Neighborhood Association, the San Bernardino Chamber of o Commerce, the Valley Lighthouse for the Blind, and representatives of the Police c Department, Fire Department, and the City Attorney's Office. .n d 1. THERE WAS DIVERSE FEEDBACK REGARDING THE EFFECTIVENESS OF CODE ENFORCEMENT SERVICES. v C6 N Each and every customer that was interviewed by the Matrix Consulting Group T a 0 appreciated the value that the Code Enforcement Division added to the City. However, m c m each and every customer believed that the Division had unrealized potential that could E m R further benefit the City. The comments regarding that unrealized potential are presented below. 0 .n (1) The Code Enforcement Division Should Enhance Consistency in ° Enforcement. E u u This comment — the lack of consistency in enforcement - was a common `o `c W concern by the customers interviewed by the Matrix Consulting Group. Code v 0 O Compliance Officers would cite a violation, but drive by a host of other violations 0 D adjacent to that violation. F m The violations that were citied include trash cans left at the curb, campers or N motorhomes parked for lengthy periods of time in the driveway or on the street, graffiti, m c d E r u m 1; Q Matrix Consulting Group Page 66 Packet Pg.727:: CITY OF SAN BERNARDINO, CALIFORNIA Management Study of the Code Enforcement Division N flags in front of businesses, stores covering most of all of their windows with d advertisements, illegal signs, etc. `o T This is not an unexpected result from the plan of organization used by the rn Division in which Code Compliance Officers are allotted to functional assignments (i.e., m E a weed abatement, 72-hour parking enforcement, etc.) and not geographic areas. M (2) The Code Enforcement Division Should Enhance Enforcement Regarding Properties with Chronic Violations Effective code enforcement is essential to revitalizing a distressed neighborhood. C 0 Problem properties can "deter investors, frustrate existing residents and generally d z contribute to an environment of fear, disorder, and crime" in a neighborhood. 7 N C6 The customers interviewed by the Matrix Consulting Group did not believe that N T D the Division was effective in addressing chronic violations at the same property. And, in rn fact, there are problems with repetitive code violations by the same property as will be E v m noted later in this report. c (3) The Code Enforcement Division Should Enhance Education Regarding o Code Enforcement A 2: 0 Another common concern was the improvement of education regarding code d E enforcement. The Code Enforcement Division should enhance the education of 2 0 `c residents and businesses regarding code enforcement issues, encourage civic pride, W d v 0 and obtain compliance with City ordinances. This included more effective use of the v 0 c Division's web page, educating children in the classroom (in concert with other City R c `w departments such as the Fire Department or Police Department), development of m c m N m ro C d LISC & MetLife Foundation, "Leveraging Code Enforcement for Neighborhood Safety Initiatives: E Insights from Community Developers', June 2007 Q Matrix Consulting Group Page 67 Packet Pg:728 CITY OF SAN BERNARDINO, CALIFORNIA Management Study of the Code Enforcement Division m educational materials and distribution through utility bill inserts, presentations to d neighborhood associations and the Chamber of Commerce, etc. 0 T (4) The Code Enforcement Division Should Address Property Maintenance of Foreclosed Homes. N c m As noted in the previous chapter, foreclosed homes represent a significant E m R problem in San Bernardino. Foreclosed properties can pose a significant threat to community stability. The problems caused by these properties include overgrown N lawns, mosquitoes breeding in unmaintained pools, opportunists stripping the homes ., c 0 for scrap metal and other valuable appliances and components, squatters taking up re residence and risking fire to get heat or electrical service, and gangs using the N o properties for illegal activities. In fact, foreclosed homes reduce the property value of N T 9 surrounding properties. A number of studies have found that houses on blocks with n abandoned homes sold for less than houses on blocks with no abandonment.8910 E m A frequent concern expressed by the customers interviewed by the Matrix Consulting Group was that the Division needed to enhance its effectiveness in assuring $ N that the banks that own the foreclosed home adequately maintained foreclosed homes. •o c (5) The Code Enforcement Division Should Enhance Its Communication with E Complainants Regarding the Status of their Complaints. 0 `c The customers interviewed by the Matrix Consulting Group did not believe that w d v 0 the Division was effective in communicating the status of cases with the complainant. v 0 c This problem also includes the manner in which the Division has setup the on-line A d complaint system at the City's web site. The Division asks the complainant to rate their m c m N 8 Pittsburgh Economic Quarterly, University of Pittsburgh, June 2009 m 00 s Furman Center for Real Estate and Urban Policy, New York University, Foreclosed Properties in NYC: A Look at the Last 15 Years, January 2010 y 10 Living Cities. "Communities At Risk: How the Foreclosure Crisis is Damaging Urban Areas and What E is Being Done About it."Washington, D.C.: Living Cities, December 2009. Q Matrix Consulting Group Page 68 PacketPg,729 CITY OF SAN BERNARDINO, CALIFORNIA Management Study of the Code Enforcement Division m satisfaction with the services provided by the Division after the Division has made the v first contact with the owner or tenant of the property that is the subject of the complaint, w 0 T but before when the complaint or code violation is resolved. N (6) The Code Enforcement Division Should Improve Its Efforts to Connect d with the Neighborhoods in the City. E rn m The customers interviewed by the Matrix Consulting Group believed that the Division should enhance its efforts to connect with the City's neighborhoods. The N Division already meets periodically with Neighborhood Associations. c 0 The customers wanted the Division to take other steps such as sponsoring d neighborhood cleanup events. These events would be a partnership between the City N m (which would provide dumpsters) and neighborhood associations (which would provide T O the labor to cleanup the neighborhood) to clean up properties by getting rid of unused ' N C items and junk. These events enable the community to dispose of unwanted items for E v a free and make their properties look better, and can become social events with c R neighbors. o 0 (7) The Code Enforcement Division Should Enhance its Weed Abatement o Program. v E The customers interviewed by the Matrix Consulting Group indicated that vacant 0 w c lots are only inspected twice a year for weeds, and that these vacant lots are frequently m v 0 O the subject of illegal dumping. Inspection of these lots on a six-month cycle results in U O c these lots containing trash, refuse, appliances, and other material for lengthy periods of c a time. m c m w m d E r u m Q Matrix Consulting Group Page 69 Packet Pg.730 8.A.a CITY OF SAN BERNARDINO, CALIFORNIA Management Study of the Code Enforcement Division v (8) The Code Enforcement Division Should Enhance the Extent of Assistance 0 Available for Low and Moderate Income Homeowners to Bring Their r Property Into Compliance with the City's Property Maintenance Ordinance. `o T Not all of the homeowners and owners of homes have the financial wherewithal w to correct violations of the City's property maintenance ordinance. Some lack that m E d ability. And yet the City provides limited financial assistance in terms of grants, low 0 N H interest loans, or volunteer assistance to address these violations. Lakewood, California, for example, provides 0% interest, deferred payment loans to seniors, o .y handicapped persons, and families of low- and moderate-income who own and occupy N their homes and need financial assistance to make repairs and other minor ;, N improvements. Lakewood's 'fix up and paint up' program provides grants of up to $1,500 to seniors, the disabled, and families of low and moderate-income who own and y d E occupy their home and need financial assistance to make minor exterior repairs. As rn m c this is a grant program, funds do not have to be repaid. Glendale, California has 2 a 0 similarly offers, in an effort to assist property owners in maintenance of their property, a 'o number of low interest loans and grant programs specifically designed to finance E v improvements for properties in need. 0 The Division should also enhance the marketing of the fagade improvement 0 0 program offered by the Economic Development Agency for businesses. O 0 c D 10 C d m G N V) m C d E L U A a Matrix Consulting Group Page 70 Packet.Pg:731 CITY OF SAN BERNARDINO, CALIFORNIA Management Study of the Code Enforcement Division m (9) The Code Enforcement Division Should Enhance the Proactive 0 Enforcement of the City Codes. d L w The work of the Code Enforcement Division is largely reactive. This is not 0 v unusual, and is the pattern in other cities to varying degrees. N d In 2010, the Division opened 877 cases that were proactive cases. Excluding E rn m rental inspections and multi-family inspections, the Division received 4,718 cases in 2010. Therefore, 19% of the cases in 2010 were proactive. Many of these were from N the proactive commercial enforcement team, which consists of two Code Compliance C 0 Officers. M d z As noted previously, three of the six cities reporting data in the comparative N A survey had higher levels of proactive enforcement, as high as 40%. N T 'O (10) The Code Enforcement Division Should Enhance its Enforcement of the y Property Maintenance Code Requirements for the City's Entrances and Its Primary Thoroughfares. E E m The City has a number of entranceways, many owned by CalTrans. The City c also has a number of primary thoroughfares. The entranceways and many of the a .y thoroughfares have not been well maintained, and the Division has not effectively o c addressed these challenges. E U (11) The Code Enforcement Division Should Enhance its Cooperation with the Police Department Homeless Advocacy Program. w d 0 0 The goal of the Homeless Advocacy Program in the Police Department is to ra 0 c collaborate with other agencies to discover an effective means to help the homeless c `v including referred to local services such as shelters, rehabilitation programs, or job m c m V) referrals. m c v E L U 10 a Matrix Consulting Group Page 71 PacketPg.:732' CITY OF SAN BERNARDINO, CALIFORNIA Management Study of the Code Enforcement Division v The effectiveness of the working relationship between the Code Enforcement 0 d Division and the Homeless Advocacy Program in the Police Department can be 0 T enhanced through more effective communication, the development of a protocol m defining the roles and responsibilities of the Code Enforcement Division and the E m Homeless Advocacy Program in the Police Department, better definition of the types of R complaints that should and should not be referred to the Homeless Advocacy Program 0 N in the Police Department by the Code Enforcement Division, periodic participation by the Code Enforcement Division in briefings by the Police Department, etc. 0 While collaboration is effective in Operation Phoenix between the Police N Department and the Code Enforcement Division, collaboration in other aspects of N addressing neighborhood preservation is not as effective. (12) The Code Enforcement Division Should Enhance its Cooperation with the ur c Police Department in the Administration of the Crime Free Ordinance. E m The Police Department and the Code Enforcement Division mutually wish the m success of the administration of the Crime Free Ordinance. o A The Code Enforcement Division should enhance its collaboration with the Police o Department in the administration of the Crime Free Ordinance including evaluating E U existing aspects of the ordinance and its effectiveness, mutually selecting the 0 w 0 apartments that are a high priority for initial administration of the Crime Free ordinance, o U 0 enhancing the training of landlords regarding effective apartment management i.e. how =_ 9 to check references and credit worthiness, participation by the Division in presentations m to Neighborhood Watch groups, etc. N m m c v E r u m Q Matrix Consulting Group Page 72 :Packet Pg.733 'f CITY OF SAN BERNARDINO, CALIFORNIA Management Study of the Code Enforcement Division m 5. DIAGNOSTIC APPRAISAL d L The diagnostic appraisal of the Code Enforcement Division provides a c T V comprehensive analysis of operations, organization, and management. In order to N c make the assessments of operational strengths and improvement opportunities, the £ d rn Matrix Consulting Group developed a set of "best management practices" against m which to evaluate the Code Enforcement Division. These measures comprise the main o thrust of this diagnostic appraisal. The measures utilized have been derived from the Matrix Consulting Group's H 4 v collective experience and from other resources professional associations such as LISC N & MetLife Foundation. These "best management practices" were utilized to identify the N T strengths of the Code Enforcement Division and improvement opportunities. rn The exhibit on the following page presents the results of the diagnostic appraisal d E d as noted below. c M Statements of "effective practices" based on the Matrix Consulting Group's C experience in evaluating code enforcement operations in other cities or 2 benchmarks or from other from other resources professional associations such as the ICMA, LISC, Enterprise Partners, NeighborWorks, etc. ° t d • Identification of whether and how the Code Enforcement Division meets the performance targets. c W The purpose of the diagnostic assessment was to develop an overall assessment of 0 U the Code Enforcement Division. °c D 1. THERE ARE A NUMBER OF STRENGTHS IN THE SERVICE DELIVERY BY c THE CODE ENFORCEMENT DIVISION. in The nature of any management study is to focus on opportunities for y M improvement. There are, however, a number of strengths in the service delivery by the d Code Enforcement Division. Examples of these strengths are presented below. u R x a Matrix Consulting Group Page 73 PacketPg.734 . 8.A.a CITY OF SAN BERNARDINO,CALIFORNIA Management Study of the Code Enforcement Division m • Goals, objectives, and performance measures have been developed. 0 • The Division has developed a formal written procedures manual for the entry of data into GOEnforce, although this manual has not been formally adopted and is not consistently utilized. rn • The Code Enforcement Division is organizationally co-located with the Planning d Division and the Building and Safety Division as part of the Community E d Development Department. • The number of management and supervisory layers within the Code Enforcement Division does not exceed four. This is an appropriate number of layers given the existing number of authorized positions within the Division. • The extent of administrative support for the Code Enforcement Division is o appropriate. There are four (4) Code Compliance Processing Assistant to support thirty-one (31) Division staff or a ratio of one (1) Code Compliance Processing Assistant for every seven (7) staff in the Division. N • The Code Enforcement Division utilizes a comprehensive array of municipal codes to address neighborhood preservation. • The Code Enforcement Division has published comprehensive information to its web site. E d m • The Code Enforcement Division uses the commercial-off-the-shelf automated information system to accept complaints and tracks actions by the Division 2 regarding complaints. o 0 • The Code Enforcement Division utilizes an administrative enforcement process c as a first response. This response has been highly effective. Based upon a v random sample in 2010 of 5,251 cases in which a Notice of Violation issued, the E Division achieved an 89% voluntary compliance rate. In other words, in 89% of the instances in which a Notice of Violation was issued in these cases, the 0 person to whom the Notice of Violation was issued voluntarily complied and d corrected the violation of the City's ordinance. This includes single-family rental o and multi-family rental inspections. The voluntary compliance rate is U 0 substantively higher than tat reported by other cities with a population in excess of 100,000 in the Comparative Performance Measurement FY 2009 Data Report R issued by the ICMA Center for Performance Measurement issued in August v 2010.11 00 R m m d " ICMA Center for Performance Measurement, Comparative Performance Measurement Report for FY E 2009 Data Report,2010 m Matrix Consulting Group Page 74 PacketPg.735 S.A.a CITY OF SAN BERNARDINO,CALIFORNIA Management Study of the Code Enforcement Division m There are a number of strengths in the service delivery of the Division that can serve 0 as the basis for improvement. 0 T 2. THERE A NUMBER OF OPPORTUNITIES FOR IMPROVEMENT IN THE SERVICE DELIVERY BY THE CODE ENFORCEMENT DIVISION. N d While there are a number of strengths in the Division, there are also a number of E rn opportunities for improvement. These opportunities for improvement are presented below. N • The Division does not maintain and publish a multi-year strategic plan. c 0 • The objectives established by the Division are not consistently (S)pecific, (M)easureable, (A)chievable, (R)elevant, and (T)ime-bound. The measures established by the Division do not completely link outputs to specific outcomes r that are meaningful to citizens. The reported results of the Division for these measures are inaccurate, in some instances. The Division's performance management system does not have a balanced mix of performance measures. $ 3 • The monthly report does not effectively report the Division's accomplishment of its goals, objectives, and performance measures. The Division lacks written E procedures for calculating and reporting workload and performance data. m m c • While the Division has developed a formal written procedures manual for the 2 entry of data into GOEnforce, the procedures were not being enforced by the o manager and the supervisors of the Division, and problems were found with An some of the data within the GOEnforce database. There is a lack of supervisory v and management control regarding the quality of data entry. E • The Code Enforcement Division has developed a procedure manual that defines program delivery methodology for staff of the Division. The manual is entitled 0 "Standard Procedures and Case Management" However, as noted earlier, this manual has not been formally adopted and is not consistently utilized. In o addition, the manual is incomplete in some of its aspects. The manual, for u 0 example, has not defined performance expectations i.e., Code Compliance =_ Supervisors will assign new cases within one (1) workday of receipt. The A manual, for example, does not define how cases are to be prioritized. The d manual, for example, does not define how the efforts of the Division are to be m coordinated with other departments or agencies such as the Police Department. n • The extent of supervisors within the Division is excessive. The ratio of non- supervisors to first line supervisors (span of control) is 5 to 1. This includes the v Senior Code Compliance Officers and Code Compliance Supervisors. E � u a Matrix Consulting Group Page 75 PacketPg.736 S.A.a CITY OF SAN BERNARDINO,CALIFORNIA Management Study of the Code Enforcement Division 0 0 0 • The administrative support staff (Code Compliance Processing Assistants) are a not utilized effectively in support of the Code Compliance Officers. Code Compliance Officers, in some instances, are performing clerical work, In some instances, these are full-time assignments (in other words, the Code Compliance Officers are performing clerical work on a full-time basis). y m • The Code Enforcement Division is not organized geographically. The Division is E organized functionally i.e., weed abatement, 72-hour vehicle abatement, commercial, residential, single-family rental, multi-family rental, etc. The use of a functional plan of organization significantly increases the inefficiency of staff since the staff focuses on the function for which they are responsible and not a geographic area as a whole. _. • The Division has not proposed an ordinance to address vacant and abandoned c buildings and lots. In August 2011, there were 2,658 foreclosed homes in San 20 Bernardino. N • The Code Enforcement Division does not conduct regular reviews of code ;, enforcement laws and processes assigned to the Division for enforcement to determine whether these laws and processes should be modified. • Code Compliance Officers are not required to possess a California Association of Code Enforcement Officers (CACEO) Basic certificate required within twelve (12) months of employment. "o • Code Compliance Officers are not required to complete a 24- hour P.O.S.T. E- module, PC 832 Arrest, Search and Seizure certification within 12 months of o employment. A 0 • Code Compliance Supervisors are not required to have a California Association v of Code Enforcement Officers (CACEO) Basic certificate and a California v Association of Code Enforcement Officers (CACEO)Advanced certificate. 0 `c • The Code Enforcement Division does not routinely schedule one hour on a bi- v weekly basis for codes training separately from organizational staff meetings. g U • The Code Enforcement Division does not assign training subjects to Code .__ Compliance Officers for these a bi-weekly basis codes training meetings. v • The Code Compliance Supervisors do not routinely present training on m problematic subject areas on a bi-weekly basis for codes training to the Code y Compliance Officers. m d E L U N Q Matrix Consulting Group Page 76 Packet Pg.737 S.A.a CITY OF SAN BERNARDINO, CALIFORNIA Management Study of the Code Enforcement Division v P Division and staff training needs have not been evaluated and identified; a o �r training strategy has not been developed, including a management and 0 supervisory development program. `o T • An employee recognition program has not been developed and implemented for the Division. y c d • The Division's web site lacks information regarding the names, City phone E numbers, and e-mail addresses of the Code Compliance Officers, the specific codes enforced by the Division (rather than links to the Municipal Code), descriptions of the how the Division responds to complaints (i.e., Notice of Violation), property maintenance standards, etc. • The Division's Weed Abatement Program does not utilize GOEnforce. Instead, the Program utilizes a legacy information system. o N • The manager and supervisors of the Division do not utilize the commercial-off- the-shelf automated information system to manage the level of service delivered N by the Division i.e., the timeliness of responses by the Division to complaints. N • The manager and supervisors of the Division do not utilize the commercial-off- a the-shelf automated information system to manage the productivity of the staff of y the Division i.e., number of inspections per day. v E • The laptop computers and portable printers used by the Division are obsolete. rn • The Code Enforcement Division does not perform regular risk assessments to 2 target inspections and allocate resources by area and need (e.g., routine c neighborhood assessments). 'o • Some other cities with similar housing quality challenges have a higher proportion of proactive enforcement— as much as 40% of their workload. E d u • The Code Enforcement Division does not have a formal, written Case priority 0 policy and procedure that ranks code violation complaints in order of priority and schedule inspections accordingly (e.g., respond to police referrals in one o workday). u 0 c • The Code Enforcement Division has not established a Landlord Training Program for single-family and multi-family rentals. v m • The Code Enforcement Division has not established partnerships with retail y shopping center managers m • The extent of financial assistance (e.g., grants, low-interest loans or deferred payment schedules) to cited properties or targeted, high-risk neighborhoods is E r u a Matrix Consulting Group Page 77 CITY OF SAN BERNARDINO, CALIFORNIA Management Study of the Code Enforcement Division v limited. The Division has not worked with other Divisions or Departments to 0 establish or enhance these programs. r • There were 2,893 Cases open as of August 21, 2011. This represents 0 approximately 20% of an annual workload for the Division. This represents almost 2 '/2 months of cases. However, 60% of these cases represent single- n family and multi-family inspections. d • The code enforcement workload is not evenly balanced among Code Compliance Officers. • In many instances, Code Compliance Officers are clearly not working a full-time caseload. In fact, the overall level of productivity if the Code Compliance Officers amounts to 60%, with the productivity of some Code Compliance Officers as low as 20%. o .N • The Code Enforcement Division does not use a formal case management system using GOEnforce. N C6 • Overall, the Code Enforcement Division does not provide an initial response / site visit to all code enforcement complaints within 5 days of assignment. The Division provides a lower level of service than metrics reported by ICMA. N • The Code Enforcement Division does not close at least 80% of the assigned E code compliance cases within 30 days of receipt of the case, and does not close "o 90% of cases within 45 days. The Division provides a lower level of service than metrics reported by ICMA. M 0 • The Code Enforcement Division does not have an effective methodology for n addressing chronic offenders. This includes cases with repeated hazardous o condition, sub-standard, and property maintenance violations. 5 E • The Code Enforcement Division does not sponsor "cleanup events' with neighborhood associations. C w 0 The City has provided more than a sufficient number of Code Compliance a U 0 Officers to provide service delivery as good or better than any in the United States. 'O R However, the Division is not achieving that level of service delivery at the d m present time. The level of service does not meet metrics: initial site visits and case y closure are longer than metrics suggest as appropriate. Overall, the productivity of c Code Compliance Officers does not meet metrics: the overall productivity of Code E U Q Matrix Consulting Group Page 78 PacketPg.739 CITY OF SAN BERNARDINO, CALIFORNIA Management Study of the Code Enforcement Division m Compliance Officers is 60% that that metrics suggest as appropriate. The Division is 0 ineffective at partnering with the neighborhoods within the City. The Division is not 0 T organized to partner effectively with the neighborhoods in the City. rn Clearly, there are a substantive number of opportunities for improvement. v rn 0 N C .y d IY N Of N T a 3 N C Cm R C R C O y 0 G d d U O C W d 0 O U 0 c a `m G N m C O N 6] W C U E U U A Q Matrix Consulting Group Page 79 Packet Pg.740 S.A.a CITY OF SAN BERNARDINO, CALIFORNIA Management Study of the Code Enforcement Division m 6. ANALYSIS OF THE PLAN OF ORGANIZATION v r This chapter presents an analysis of the opportunities to improve the plan of o 9 organization of the Code Enforcement Division. y c 1. IN EVALUATING THE PLAN OF ORGANIZATION, A NUMBER OF E PRINCIPLES SHOULD BE CONSIDERED. rn M Evaluating the sustainability and the effectiveness of the Code Enforcement 0 Division necessitates consideration of a number of principles. These principles are presented in the paragraphs below. c An • Organization structure The criterion for this dimension includes whether there v are clear lines of accountability, the management / supervisory layers and spans of control are appropriate (based upon the nature of the work, business processes involved, and interactions required for decision-making), and if like N processes and functions are grouped together efficiently and effectively r (functional cohesion). in • Communication and Coordination - The criterion for this dimension includes d the number of handoffs / exchanges required, physical / virtual proximity E importance, shared knowledge/ understanding within divisions and units and channel clarity (are there clear and consistent lines of communication?). • Resource Utilization - The criterion for this dimension includes total headcount °- A comparison, administrative overhead, workload management distribution, process efficiency / standardization and resource sharing capacity. ° c E • Service Quality and Responsiveness - The criterion for this dimension includes cycle times, stakeholder input / user friendliness, performance `o management, quality control/ number of checks and balances, and consistency w of policy/ procedure application. 0 U • Agility and Flexibility - The criterion for this dimension includes the scalability °c to manage peaks and valleys and adaptability to offer cross-functional T capabilities. "c 0 M • Human Capital - The criterion for this dimension includes enhanced career A development opportunities, training, recruiting, and retaining capabilities. ur m Reorganization efforts that ignore these broader principles could create d E new, unintended consequences for the Code Enforcement Division in the future. a a Matrix Consulting Group Page 80 ` PackptPg.741 S:A.a CITY OF SAN BERNARDINO, CALIFORNIA Management Study of the Code Enforcement Division m /^ 2. THESE MEASURES FOCUSED THE ANALYSIS OF ALTERNATIVES TO THE o \./ EXISTING ORGANIZATIONAL STRUCTURE FOR THE CODE L ENFORCEMENT DIVISION. `o T These measures were then converted into a matrix to enable the Matrix N Consulting Group to develop and evaluate alternatives to the existing plan of E m organization for the Code Enforcement Division. The primary purpose of the matrix was R to focus the project team on the alternatives and to evaluate each of those alternatives 0 N using each of these criteria. 0 m w Organization and Structure Clear lines of accountability i Sans of control/number of management layers N Functional cohesion T Communication and cohesion Hand-offs/exchan es internal/external Physical/virtual proximity v Shared knowledge/understanding knowledge/understanding E 0 m m Resource Utilization Cost c m Administrative overhead Workload management even distribution 0 Process efficient /standardization 'H Resource sharing 0 Human Capital m Career development E v Training Recruitment and retention c W Agility and Flexibility of the Organization Scalabili (ability to manage peaks and valleys) 0 U Adaptability cross functional capability) o c v Service Quality and Responsiveness `m Customer service v Performance management m Quali control checks and balances C M Consistent of policy/procedure application `n m m c 0 E r u Q Matrix Consulting Group Page 81 PacketPg. 742 CITY OF SAN BERNARDINO, CALIFORNIA Management Study of the Code Enforcement Division m Alternatives were developed using these criteria, and a set of arguments for and 0 v against each alternative was then constructed that led to a recommendation of a 0 T preferred alternative. 2 N 3. THE CONSULTING TEAM DEVELOPED TWO ALTERNATIVE STRUCTURES d FOR ORGANIZING CAPITAL PROGRAM SERVICES. E m m The purpose of this section of the chapter is to explain and illustrate the use of structural alternatives to the existing plan of organization for the Code Enforcement Division. In order to focus the consulting team on the outcomes that could be achieved 0 0 with a structural redesign, the consulting team developed two viable structural d alternatives. One alternative — Scenario "A" — left CPS as it currently is structured. The N C6 other alternative — Scenario "B" — includes the proposed plan of reorganization for CPS. N T 'O However, Scenario "B" has two perspectives — a short-term and a long-term. The short- U) term perspective is based upon existing filled managerial and supervisory positions. E E m The long-term does not include those constraints. The evaluation of these two alternatives focused on exploring how synergies `o .2 could and would benefit the Code Enforcement Division as a whole. The potential o c w synergies amongst the two different structural alternatives were evaluated taking into v U consideration factors such as: w d • Changes in reporting responsibility; $ U 0 • Functions / processes grouped together to enhance efficiency; v • Reduction of hand-offs and exchanges; m c • Better management and distribution of workload; N • Standardization of processes; m c m E r U N Q Matrix Consulting Group Page 82 Packet Pg.743 9:X.a CITY OF SAN BERNARDINO, CALIFORNIA Management Study of the Code Enforcement Division m • Reduction in cycle time taking into consideration quality of product/service 0 offered; z 0 • Greater resource sharing; D • Superior flexibility in managing peaks and valleys; y c a Cross-functional training capability; and E rn A Enhanced training and career development opportunities. This process ultimately led the team to conclusions regarding the comparative strengths and weaknesses of each structural alternative. The following section c 0 describes the structural alternatives used in the evaluation process. d to 4. "AS IS" PLAN OF ORGANIZATION OF THE CODE ENFORCEMENT N DIVISION o, N Scenario A is the current state or "As-Is" structure of the Code Enforcement Division. An evaluation of the existing or "As Is" plan of the Code Enforcement Division c 0 E organization using the six previously mentioned measures is provided below. rn c (1) Evaluation of Scenario "A" -the "As Is' Plan of Organization c 0 The existing plan of organization is presented in the second exhibit in Chapter 2 'o (see exhibit 2). The evaluation of the "As Is" plan of organization is presented below. E • Organization and Structure. The advantages to the "As Is" plan of organization as it pertains to organization and structure is the number of management and supervisory layers within the Division. Organizational units with fewer than 50 v employees should have three or fewer management layers.12 (The layers are o counted from the lowest level supervisor / manager up to the most senior U 0 supervisor / manager). There are only three layers in the Division: the Code 5 Compliance Supervisor / Senior Code Compliance Officer, the Code Enforcement Division Manager, and the Community Development Director. m However, the disadvantage to the "As Is" plan of organization as it pertains to y organization and structure is the spans of control that exist. The ratio of first line ao supervisors to non-supervisors should be between 1 to 6 and 1 to 12 for the c v 12 City of Portland Span of Control Study, prepared for the City of Portland, Oregon Audit Services E Division by Public Knowledge, Inc. and The Kemp Consulting Group, 1994. m x Q Matrix Consulting Group Page 83 Packet Pg.744 ;' CITY OF SAN BERNARDINO,CALIFORNIA Management Study of the Code Enforcement Division d Division. 13 The existing spans of control for the two (2) Senior Code 0 `r Compliance Officers (including the vacant Senior Code Compliance Officer position) and the three (3) Code Compliance Supervisors each averages five (5) 5 Code Compliance Officers. This is a narrow span of control. With one less supervisory position, the span of control would average a little more than six (6) Code Compliance Officers for each supervisor. With two less supervisory n positions, the span of control would average a little more than eight (8) Code Compliance Officers for each supervisor. v m m There are other disadvantages to the existing plan of organization of the Division as it pertains to the organization and structure criteria. This includes the lack of clarity in accountability for service delivery. The Division uses a N functional plan of organization. Code Compliance Officers are responsible for enforcement of different portions of the City's ordinances i.e., 72-hour parking, weed abatement, single-family rental inspection, commercial, etc. Code o Compliance Officers are not responsible for specific geographic areas of the .� City. As comments by customers attest, this has resulted in a lack of accountability by the Code Compliance Officers i.e., "I am only responsible for N 72-hour parking violations" The other disadvantage to the existing plan of A organization of the Division, as it pertains to the organization and structure criteria, is the use of a functional or "silo" plan of organization detracts from the a cohesion of Code Compliance Officers in working together as a team in enforcing the full range of ordinances in a geographic area of the City. Instead, Code Compliance Officers work together to enforce specific sections of parts of the City's ordinances i.e., "I am only responsible for 72-hour parking violations." o In addition, the "silo" approach to organization of the Division and large diversity of functionally distinct (though related) specialties in service delivery requires n active management and supervisory oversight. `o 0 • Communication and Cohesion. The advantages of the "As Is" plan of o organization of the Code Enforcement Division include (1) the Division can v effectively manage the knowledge set of its staff given the similarity of skills; (2) E cross-functional knowledge sharing is easier with the consolidated organizational structure for service delivery in the Division (i.e., all of the City's code enforcement services are located within the Division); and (3) the co- w a location of the staff of the Division with the staff of the Community Development g Department (in the same building and with many on the same floor in the Civic U 0 Center). E A However, the disadvantages of the existence of "As Is" plan of organization of the Division include (1) "message mixing" and confusion regarding the roles and m responsibilities for Code Compliance Officers given the functional plan Of m organization i.e., "I am only responsible for 72-hour parking violations and not the other visible ordinance violations"; (2) the sharing of knowledge is more d 73 City, of Portland Span of Control Study, prepared for the City of Portland, Oregon Audit Services t Division by Public Knowledge, Inc. and The Kemp Consulting Group, 1994. 0 m a Matrix Consulting Group Page 84 Packet Pg. 745 CITY OF SAN BERNARDINO, CALIFORNIA Management Study of the Code Enforcement Division m difficult since Code Compliance Officers specialize in the enforcement of u specific portions of the City's ordinances; and (3) the number of handoffs I t exchanges of cases increases since Code Compliance Officers specialize in the enforcement of specific portions of the City's ordinances i.e., if the Code a Compliance Officer assigned to 72-hour parking violations observes a sign ordinance violation, that Code Compliance Officer would handoff that case to N the Code Compliance Officers assigned to commercial enforcement. d E v • Resource Utilization. The advantages of the "As Is" plan of organization of the Division include (1) sharing of resources, including staff and equipment, is more easily accommodated within the single structure for code enforcement service delivery in the Division; and (2) the opportunity to standardize and optimize internal administrative processes is enhanced with the consolidated organizational structure for code enforcement service delivery in the Division. c 0 However, the disadvantages of the "As Is" plan of organization of the Division include that (1) there is a greater extent of administrative / overhead costs with the spans of control within the Division; (2) workload cannot be effectively N managed across Code Compliance Officers i.e., the two season workload in ;, weed abatement versus the year-round workload for single-family rental N inspection; and (3) resource sharing is impeded by the functional plan of organization i.e., "I am only responsible for 72-hour parking violations and not N the other visible ordinance violations". Under the current organizational t�^ approach, some Code Compliance Officers are clearly underutilzed. E E m • Service Quality and Responsiveness. The advantages of the "As Is" plan of organization of the Division include (1) improved code enforcement service 2 delivery quality assurance with the single structure for code enforcement service o delivery in the Division; and (2) consistent application of code enforcement T policies and procedures, judgment, etc. is facilitated with the single structure for 'o code enforcement service delivery in the Division. v E However, the disadvantages of the "As Is" plan of organization of CPS include (1) eliminating conflicting and / or incomplete responses to customer service due 0 to the use of a functional plan of organization i.e., "I am only responsible for 72- v hour parking violations and not the other types of observed violations"; and (2) g developing accountability for the responsive customer service for the full range o of code enforcement is complicated by the use of a functional plan of E organization i.e., the lack of customer understanding as to why the Code 3 Compliance Officer only focuses on 72-hour parking violations and not other d observable violations in a neighborhood. m M • Agility and Flexibility. There are not any advantages of the "As Is" plan of y m organization of the Division as it regards the agility and flexibility criteria. m a E z u A Q Matrix Consulting Group Page 85 CITY OF SAN BERNARDINO, CALIFORNIA Management Study of the Code Enforcement Division v The disadvantages of the "As Is" plan of organization of the Division include (1) 0 the adaptability of the Division is limited given the functional plan of organization t i.e., the ability to shift "generalist" Code Compliance Officers from one priority to w another in comparison to a plan of organization in which Code Compliance ;• Officers are one dimensional i.e., "I am only responsible for 72-hour parking violations'; and (2) a functional organizations hinders responses to peak and N valley workload since Code Compliance Officers only enforce a the limited m range of ordinances and a specific set(s) of ordinances. £ E rn • Human Capital. The advantages of the "As Is" plan of organization of the Division include the enhanced opportunity to create and sustain a consistent organizational culture and operational philosophy by the consolidated organizational structure for code enforcement service delivery in the Division. The disadvantages to the "As Is" plan of organization of the Division include (1) o the limitations of a functional plan of organization to train code enforcement A professionals capable of enforcing the full-range of ordinances; and (2) increased Career advancement and professional development potential is N hindered by the functional plan of organization. In addition, there are two classification issues that impact human capital. T 'O — An "equal work for equal pay" issue exists within the Division. A Senior 2 Code Compliance Officer is being utilized to supervise six (6) Code Compliance Officers with the same roles and responsibilities as the three £ (3) Code Compliance Supervisors. — There are four (4) Code Compliance Processing Assistant positions in the E Division. These are the only four (4) such positions in the City's workforce. c While the work that these four (4) positions perform is unique, it is not so unique that these knowledge, skills, and abilities could not be o accommodated in another classification. Customer Services Representative is the classification utilized by the Building and Safety E Division to meet their support staff requirements, and this classification is assigned to the same pay grade as Code Compliance Processing 0 Assistant. d a 0 The current organization of the Code Enforcement Division has many advantages. c v There are, however, substantive disadvantages. v (2) Scenario B — Short-Term Plan of Organization Based On A Geographical m Allocation of Code Enforcement Officers. h Scenario B modifies the allocation of Code Compliance Officers - using a short- 00 G term perspective — by assigning these Code Compliance Officers to specific E u a Matrix Consulting Group Page 86 PacketPg.747 B.A.a CITY OF SAN BERNARDINO, CALIFORNIA Management Study of the Code Enforcement Division m CWgeographical areas. The Code Compliance Officers would be responsible for the full 0 range of City ordinances pertaining to the Division within that geographic area. In w 0 T addition, this short-term plan addresses the classification issues that exist with the N existing plan of organization by reclassifying the two (2) Senior Code Compliance E Officers to Code Compliance Supervisors (if the incumbents meet the minimum A qualifications for the classification of Code Compliance Supervisor) and reclassifying 0 the (4) Code Compliance Processing Assistants to Customer Service Representatives. There are a number of advantages to this plan of organization as noted below. o .N • Organization and Structure. Scenario B would assign Code Compliance Supervisors and Code Compliance Officers to specific geographic areas to N enhance the development of partnerships with the communities in San Bernardino. In a city where the demographics are changing, it is increasingly important for the Division and the community that it serves to form partnerships. a This partnership is important to develop innovative strategies to improve / N preserve neighborhoods. The staff of the Division should be an extension of the geographic area that it serves. In order to enhance community / Division interaction, Code Compliance Officers should be assigned specific geographical areas of responsibility. The Code Compliance Officer should be responsible, as a "generalist', for responding to reported violations and also proactively initiating cases for this specific geographical area of responsibility, and collaborating with o neighborhood association members to find solution to problems that arise in the specific geographical area of responsibility. In addition, the "unity of command" o principal would be emphasized, with a single accountable Code Compliance v Supervisor responsible for the delivery of code enforcement related activities in v a specific geographical area of responsibility. 0 However, there remain disadvantages with the Scenario B short-term plan of organization as it pertains to organization and structure. There remains a o substantive amount of administrative / overhead costs associated with the v 0 supervisory spans of control: in other words, there are too many supervisors __ given the number of Code Compliance Officers. R v • Communication and Coordination. The advantages to the Scenario B short- m term plan of organization is that it begins to address problems that can occur y with "message mixing", and reduces the problems with accountability for code ro enforcement service delivery and the number of handoffs / exchanges. Accountability will be increased as items can no longer "fall between the cracks' of the different organizational "silos" in the Division. Cross-functional knowledge rE A a Matrix Consulting Group Page 87 CITY OF SAN BERNARDINO, CALIFORNIA Management Study of the Code Enforcement Division m sharing among Code Compliance Officers is easier within a "generalist" 0 structure. Opportunities for "message mixing" through the communications i channel are minimized as contrasted to a "silo" plan of organization. w 0 r • Resource Utilization. The advantages to the Scenario B short-term plan of organization is that it enhances the ability of managers and supervisors in the y Division to balance workload through geographical allocation of workload among m Code Compliance Officers, and enhances the opportunity for resource sharing E since Code Compliance Officers are responsible for the enforcement of the full range of City ordinances that pertain to code enforcement in their assigned specific geographical areas, would function as "generalists" and not be isolated in organizational "silos", and can be transferred, based upon workload, to other N geographical areas within the City should circumstances warrant. However, there still remains a substantive number of supervisors relative to non- .2 supervisory staff. v c • Service Quality and Responsiveness. The advantages of Scenario B short- N term plan of organization is that it (1) clarifies roles and responsibilities from a ;, citizen perspective; (2) reduces the potential for conflicting and / or incomplete responses to customer service by utilizing a "generalist" approach to service a delivery, rather than a "silo" approach, with the "generalists" responsible for code enforcement service delivery in a specific geographical area; and (3) u, c enhances accountability for responsive customer service i.e., the Code £ Compliance Officer is responsible for all violations in a neighborhood for those o ordinances that pertain to code enforcement. Combining functions into single geographical work groups will facilitate cooperation, reduce "finger pointing" and 2 creates shared ownership of results. Performance measures and standards are o comparatively easy to establish as contrasted to "silo" organizations. However, care will have to be taken that as the knowledge base is broadened, specialized o skills are not lost. v E • Agility and Flexibility. There are a number of advantages of the Scenario B short-term plan of organization as it regards the agility and flexibility criteria. The advantages of the "advantages of the Scenario B short-term plan of organization w d include (1) the adaptability of the Division is enhanced in terms of its ability to 0 shift "generalist" Code Compliance Officers from one priority to another; (2) the Division is better able to respond to peak and valley workload with "generalist" E Code Compliance Officers with knowledge in the day-to-day application of the full range of ordinances pertaining to the Division; and (3) scalability (the ability v to grow and/or shrink in response to workload / customer demands) is improved 00 since staff can be more readily be shifted from one geographic area to another N as "generalists". m • Human Capital. The advantages of the Scenario B short-term plan of organization are that this alternative (1) addresses the classification issues E U A Q Matrix Consulting Group Page 88 Packet Pg.749 CITY OF SAN BERNARDINO, CALIFORNIA Management Study of the Code Enforcement Division v within the Division; (2) it enhances the knowledge and skills of the code 0 enforcement professionals since these professionals would be responsible for r enforcing the full-range of ordinances pertaining to the Division; (3) increased career advancement and professional development potential would be possible 0 with the use of a "generalist' approach; and (4) Scenario B creates an enhanced opportunity to create and sustain a consistent organizational culture and in operational philosophy in the Division with the use of "generalists', congruent d with those of the executive leadership and policy makers, is enhanced. Overall, E Scenario B provides the opportunity to create strong "communities of practice" for code enforcement, enhancing opportunities for personal growth and professional development, and increased capacity for cross-functional training. 0 in N However, consolidation of separate "silos' can engender significant change resistance, fear, uncertainty and resistance. These issues will require explicit identification, acknowledgement and planning. `0_ 0 The cost impact of this alternative — Scenario B — is presented in the table below. N It reflects the additional compensation costs in terms of salary and fringe benefits (at ;, N 35% of salary) at the top step of the salary range. Overall, the net cost increase would v 3 N approximate $21,100 annually. m AOnual Costta � 1 s , An uat Cost co�mmendAWRI!, *"* g0,`S3"avm S�*„�e�..;.. MOO nt t�`d`at1o14`. ir«ta. ±,.�xfnG'i 801c°k c Eliminate two Senior Code $201,400 Authorize two Code $222,500 Compliance Officer positions Compliance Supervisor positions 2 •o d E v The Matrix Consulting Group recommends the adoption of Scenario B as a o W short-term plan of organization for the Code Enforcement Division. v 0 U Recommendation #4: The Code Enforcement Division should assign each Code 0 Compliance Officer to a specific geographical area within the City based upon a v workload assessment. The Code Compliance Officers should be responsible for cc the full range of City ordinances pertaining to the Division within that geographic m area. C N Recommendation #5: The Code Compliance supervisors should each be ro assigned a district within the City with responsibility for supervising Code LO Compliance Officers within that district. E U a Matrix Consulting Group Page 89 'Packet Pg.750 CITY OF SAN BERNARDINO, CALIFORNIA Management Study of the Code Enforcement Division m Recommendation #6: The two (2) Senior Code Compliance Officers should be 0 reclassified to Code Compliance Supervisor (if the incumbents meet the 0 minimum qualifications for the classification of Code Compliance Supervisor). `o T Recommendation #7: The four (4) Code Compliance Processing Assistant positions should be reclassified to Customer Service Representatives. n c m (3) Scenario C — Long-Term Plan of Organization to Streamline the Plan of E Organization. m In the longer-term, the spans of control should be brought within the 0 n benchmarks or metrics. This would necessitate the elimination of one (1) Code Compliance Supervisor position through attrition. It would result in a span of control of `o .N six Code Compliance Officers for each Code Compliance Supervisor. N The cost impact of this alternative — Scenario B — is presented in the table below. N It reflects the additional compensation costs in terms of salary and fringe benefits (at r v rn 35% of salary) at the top step of the salary range. m E _Anmi d m Recommendation c m Eliminate one 1 Code Compliance Supervisor position through attrition. $111,250 0 .N Recommendation #8: A Code Compliance Supervisor position should be > eliminated through attrition. ° c v E v U O C W d 0 O U O c a M F `0 M c m N CI m C E E L U R Q Matrix Consulting Group Page 90 Packet Pg 751 S.A.a CITY OF SAN BERNARDINO, CALIFORNIA Management Study of the Code Enforcement Division 0 7. ANALYSIS OF MANAGEMENT SYSTEMS d L This chapter presents an analysis of the management systems employed by the o T Code Enforcement Division. This analysis includes: n • Goals, objectives, and performance measures; £ E rn • Performance measurement reporting systems; and Development of written protocols between the Code Enforcement Division and the Police and Fire departments regarding the delivery of services pertaining to the Homeless Advocacy Program, the administration of the Crime Free Ordinance, Operation Phoenix, and the inspection of multi-family residences. 0 .y The driving force behind any high performing organization is clear direction and the management systems that communicate and translate that direction into action. C4 N The Code Enforcement Division faces a number of challenges to use its resources r a more efficiently and effectively, and more importantly, to direct and invest those n v resources in the enhancement and preservation of the City's neighborhoods. The E m m Division is limited in its ability to address these challenges as a result of the lack of c management systems. The manager and supervisors of the Division needs to enhance y Z the management systems of the Division. ° v 1. THE CODE ENFORCEMENT DIVISION SHOULD DEVELOP A STRATEGIC PLAN. `o w c w The California Challenge is a self-assessment recognition program designed v 0 U and administered exclusively by the California Awards for Performance Excellence 'v under the direction of the California Council for Excellence. The primary objective of v m California Awards for Performance Excellence is to help an organization understand its strengths and opportunities for improvement as defined by the Malcolm Baldrige m National Quality Award program. The award program recognizes organizations that E E 0 a Matrix Consulting Group Page 91 Packet Pg.752 '... CITY OF SAN BERNARDINO, CALIFORNIA Management Study of the Code Enforcement Division v demonstrate superior performance in seven (7) key business areas including v al leadership; strategic planning; customer and market focus; measurement, analysis and `o T knowledge management; workforce focus; process management; and results. One of rn these seven key business areas includes strategic planning.14 E to The Code Enforcement Division has not developed a strategic plan. m Why develop a strategic plan? 0 N rn Public sector managers and supervisors are often so preoccupied with _ immediate issues that they lose sight of their ultimate goals. That's why a strategic plan o .m is a virtual necessity for the Division. In essence, it is not possible to develop relevant N objectives and action plans for the Division without first determining why the Division N exists, where it (and the City) is going, and defining a broad direction for the Division. N This is graphically displayed in the chart below. E E d m c Validate organization Purpose and Function ^� MISSI6N "wM the organization exists" G mac Q� Identify Future state and Implications > VISION `where H is going' m Define and Prioritize Broad Direction E fi) 'How you know you are there- r� GOALS `o Develop Specfw IC Targets and Actindies p, First Level at°How"to W COBJECTIVES Achieve Goals and Ycbn V Assign Respo.bflity, C Q SpecdY Steps,Allocate Tme,and Develop rC ACTION PLANS Performance Metrics c v d Q Execute and m Mondor the Plan m IMPLEMENTATION ul m c ar E L 14 California Council for Excellence, California Challenge Award, Criteria and Application, 2006 m Q Matrix Consulting Group Page 92 FFacke{pg,753 5 CITY OF SAN BERNARDINO, CALIFORNIA Management Study of the Code Enforcement Division m �^ The best practices regarding development of a strategic plan that should be 0 � „/ utilized by the Division are presented in the table below. 6 0 r 9 The Code Enforcement Division has a multi-year strategic plan with annual goals and measurable y objectives based on identified needs, projected workload,and expenditures and revenues. E E The Code Enforcement Division maintains and publishes a clearly written, multi-year(five years at a d minimum)strategic plan to provide vision and direction for the CPS. The plan links District and CPS goals. m In developing the strategic plan,the Division: 0 n Identifies and formally adopts a limited number(5 to 10)of Division priorities to guide its strategies and major financial and program decisions; Considers the impacts of the District's financial condition,five-year capital program, current expenditures by the Division, and opportunities to reallocate staff and other resources to enhance c performance; and An Instructs Division management and supervisors on how these priorities should be considered in K making program and budget decisions. N The strategic plan clearly delineates the Division goals,and objectives and strategies for achieving them. N In developing these strategies, Division considers alternative service delivery systems such as outsourcing. a The plan also delineates the priorities the City's strategic plan in developing its goals, objectives, and y strategies. a a E The objectives in the strategic plan are measurable, and the Division has set annual objectives for each m goal for at least five years into the future. c m The Division's goals, objectives,and performance measures are based on past performance, identified o needs, projected workload, and expenditures and revenues. .2 The plan delineates the managers and supervisors responsible for implementing the strategies in the plan and the time frames for implementation. m E The Code Enforcement Division Manager annually assesses the progress the Division has made toward u achieving the goals and objectives in the plan. w L W In developing the strategic plan for the Division, the managers and supervisors o U of the Division should (1) identify its strengths, weaknesses, threats (e.g., the "increasing $ 9 number of foreclosed homes, recessionary impact on incomes, etc.), and opportunities v m (e.g., use of a Dashboard within GOEnforce to measure performance); (2) develop a m vision and mission statement for the Division; (3) define the goals, objectives and m c strategies the Division will utilize to achieve those goals, objectives and strategies; and E 5 R a Matrix Consulting Group Page 93 Packe[Pg. 754 8.AA -` CITY OF SAN BERNARDINO, CALIFORNIA Management Study of the Code Enforcement Division 0 (4) define the managerial responsibilities for accomplishing those goals, objectives and 0 d strategies. w 0 Recommendation #9: The Code Enforcement Division should develop a clearly written, five-year minimum, strategic plan. rn E 0 Recommendation #10: The Code Enforcement Division Manager should direct E the Code Compliance supervisors, as appropriate, to develop and implement the strategic plan. 2. THE CODE ENFORCEMENT DIVISION SHOULD ENHANCE ITS GOALS, N OBJECTIVES AND PERFORMANCE MEASURES. r The Code Enforcement Division has developed and adopted goals, objectives, .y and performance measures. The goal of the Division for fiscal year 2010-11 - N presented as the Program Purpose - is presented below. ;, N To promote the safety and beautification of the community and improve the quality of life for residents by working with residents, business owners, ' neighborhood organizations and other departments and agencies to ensure that existing buildings and properties conform to the property E maintenance ordinances and other applicable codes. rn A c Similarly, the Division has developed and adopted objectives - presented as 2 c 0 Fiscal Year 2011-12 Program Objectives. These objectives are presented below. 0 1. Identify and adopt new policies, procedures and ordinances to assist all departments in addressing the increase in vacant, E abandoned and foreclosed properties throughout the City. (carry over) w c 2. Implement annual inspections of conditions of approval and m d mitigation measures on discretion permits. a 3. Inspect and invoice all identified single-family rental properties. L) 0 4. Educate property owners on City requirements for maintaining =_ their property and on the consequences for non-compliance. R 5. Ensure information on all general code enforcement activities is �`- online and in two languages. 6. All Code Enforcement Officer II's are to be CACEO certified at w intermediate level. 7. Increase collection rate of the annual inspection fees. m 8. Contract with an independent collection agency. E L u m Matrix Consulting Group Page 94 Packet Pg.,755 f S.A.a CITY OF SAN BERNARDINO, CALIFORNIA Management Study of the Code Enforcement Division 0 9. Increase collection rates to a minimum of 80% by working with 0 Finance and other affected Departments to contract with an r independent collection agency rather than collections through the w lien process. 10. Implement the illegal and abandoned commercial signage inventory and abatement program required by Development Code. N 11. Implement full 7-day code enforcement coverage with full day d supervision and minimum 50% staffing of required deployment E team. ° A These are not objectives. The objectives of the Division are not time-based, and, in 0 most instances, are not measurable. Objectives should be desired accomplishments that can be measured within a `o .2 given time frame. Achievement of the objective advances the program toward the goal N of the program. Accordingly, objectives must be developed that support and contribute ;, N to the achievement of the established goal.15161 These objectives should be specific, 0 N measurable, achievable, realistic, and time-based. v E Objectives are desired accomplishments that can be measured within a given rn c time frame. Achievement of the objective advances the program toward the goal of the 2 C 0 program. Accordingly, objectives must be developed that support and contribute to the 'o achievement of the established goal.181920 Objectives should be specific, measurable, E d achievable, realistic, and time-based. 0 c W u 0 0 U i5 Fairfax County, Virginia, A Manual for Performance Measurement, 2005. 16 National State Auditors Association, Best Practices in Performance Measurement — Developing Performance Measures, 2004. c " National Performance Management Advisory Commission, A Performance Management Framework m for State and Local Government — From Measurement and Reporting to Management and Improving, 2010. m N 1e Fairfax County,Virginia,A Manual for Performance Measurement, 2005. 19 National State Auditors Association, Best Practices in Performance Measurement — Developing Performance Measures, 2004. 20 National Performance Management Advisory Commission, A Performance Management Framework for State and Local Government — From Measurement and Reporting to Management and Improving, E E 2010. 0 m Q Matrix Consulting Group Page 95 Pac1(etWg.756 1 CITY OF SAN BERNARDINO,CALIFORNIA Management Study of the Code Enforcement Division m ^ The development of goals, objectives and performance measures at the 0 d program level by the Division should consider the guidelines presented below. 0 a • Goals should be developed for each program within the Division. These goals could give specific direction on how the programs will contribute to the H goals of the Division. Examples of these programs include single-family rental d inspection, multi-family rental inspection, weed abatement, property E maintenance, etc. These goals should be not quantifiable. These goals should span multiple years. • Objectives could be developed for each program within the Division. Objectives are outcome-based statements of what specifically will be achieved within the fiscal year. Each program should have 7 to 9 objectives. The programs could include property maintenance, single-family rental inspections, c multi-family rental inspections, weed abatement, etc. The objectives should .� clearly demonstrate progress toward the goal of the Division. These objectives should be written to allow measurement of progress, and be quantifiable. N • Performance measures could be developed for each objective. Performance measures could convey the extent to which an objective has been met. These measures could include a range of indicators including workload / N output, efficiency, service quality, and outcome. For example, an output (� measure could be the quantity or number of units produced such as the number £ `�• of proactive code enforcement cases. For example, an efficiency measure could m be the inputs used per unit of output such as the cost of single-family rental inspections per rental unit. Examples of service quality measure could be (1) the 2 degree to which customers are satisfied with a program, or (2) how long it takes, o on average, to close cases, in which the resident or business voluntarily agrees to resolve the violation, from the date the cases it was opened to the date it was o closed. For example, an outcome measure could be the qualitative v consequences associated with a program or service — the ultimate benefit to a v customer. An example would be a condition assessment of housing structures in a particular neighborhood. w 0 • The Division should develop reliable and accurate data to measure o performance. Some the performance data reported within the budget for the U 0 Division does not appear to be accurate (i.e., 60% of the cases were closed and —_ abated within 30 days). Each performance measure needs a consistent reliable data source and needs to be portrayed accurately and reliably. The Division d should continue to use GOEnforce to collect and to generate this data. This 00 c software provides a wealth of data. N • The Division should communicate and use performance measurement data for decision-making and accountability reporting. The Division manager and supervisors should communicate their commitment to the value E U Q Matrix Consulting Group Page 96 CITY OF SAN BERNARDINO, CALIFORNIA Management Study of the Code Enforcement Division m and use of goals, objectives, and performance measures to all Division staff. 0 and how this data will be used to hold the Division and staff accountable. The Division manager and supervisors should report the data regarding their w objectives and performance measures on a monthly basis. The Division 0 manager and supervisors should communicate the results of these goals, objectives, and performance measures internally to its staff on a monthly basis. y Z 0 Possible performance measures that could be utilized by the Division and their linkage E m to possible goals for the Division are presented in the exhibit following this page. The Administrative Analyst within the Community Development Department should be assigned responsibility for providing training and technical assistance to the c 0 manager and supervisors of the Division in the development of goals, objectives, and d o: performance measures. A The performance measurement reporting should not be difficult given the wealth N T D of data available within GOEnforce. N Recommendation #11: The Code Enforcement Division should develop goals and E objectives for each program within the Division. rn m c Recommendation #12: The Code Enforcement Division should enhance its 2 performance measures. `o y .j Recommendation #13: The Administrative Analyst within the Community o Development Department should be assigned responsibility for providing training and technical assistance to the Code Enforcement Division manager and E supervisors in the development of goals, objectives, and performance measures. 0 `c 3. THE CODE ENFORCEMENT DIVISION SHOULD DEVELOP AN EFFECTIVE d MONTHLY PERFORMANCE REPORTING SYSTEM. o U 0 One of the Division's strengths is GOEnforce — the automated information =_ 'v A system built for code enforcement. This automated information system contains a m substantive amount of information regarding each case opened by the Division, albeit N there are some problems with the quality and completeness of the data regarding c these cases. E t U N Q Matrix Consulting Group Page 97 Packet Pg.758 8.A.a CITY OF SAN BERNARDINO, CALIFORNIA Management Study of the Code Enforcement Division d Exhibit 8 (1) u t Sample Performance Measures o T a 3 Type of Measure Sample Performance Measures ur c N Workload/Output Active (open) case count by priority level and by type of case E • Number of cases opened in the most recent month,fiscal year- a to-date, and a comparison to same month last fiscal year and m last fiscal year-to-date by priority level and by type of case 20 • Distribution of active cases by priority status level and by type of case for each district and each officer w • Distribution of active caseload by type of violation for each district and each officer • Closed case count in the most recent month,fiscal year-to-date, and a comparison to same month last fiscal year and last fiscal 2 year-to-date •h Distribution of closed cases by type of violation for each district and each officer N N • Number of notices of violation issued • Number of administrative citations issued N • Number of warrants issued • Number of contract abatements on personal property by type of -o case • Number of hearings N V v Service Quality Age of each case in the active caseload by priority status level E and by type of case for each district and each officer in terms of m m calendar days • Average age and oldest/newest age of active caseload by priority status level and by type of case for each district and c each officer in terms of calendar days 'H • Age of each case at closure by priority status level and by type •? of case for each district and each officer in terms of calendar days • Average age and oldest/newest age of cases at closure by E priority status level and by type of case for each district and each officer in terms of calendar days • Average calendar days and minimum/maximum calendar days w from submittal of complaint to first site visit for each district and W each officer i0 • Number of cases opened by officers (not complaints received o from citizens)in the most recent month,fiscal year-to-date,and c a comparison to same month last fiscal year and last fiscalO year-to-date by priority level, by type of case, by officer, and by c district `m • Number of cases closed voluntarily by type of case as a m percentage of all cases closed in the most recent month • Number of cases closed involuntarily Y b type of case as a N percentage of all cases closed in the most recent month m c v E U [cv U Q Matrix Consulting Group Page 98 Packet Pg. 759 8.A.a CITY OF SAN BERNARDINO, CALIFORNIA Management Study of the Code Enforcement Division 0 Exhibit 8 (2) 0 d t 0 a 3 N Type of Measure Sample Performance Measures y E Efficiency Average new caseload per officer in the most recent month, rn fiscal year-to-date, and a comparison to same month last fiscal c year and last fiscal year-to-date Average open caseload per officer in the most recent month, fiscal year-to-date, and a comparison to same month last fiscal year and last fiscal ear-to-date Outcome Overall case closure rate as a proportion of cases opened in the most recent month,fiscal year-to-date, and a comparison to 2 same month last fiscal year and last fiscal year-to-date D Overall case closure rate as a proportion of cases opened in the most recent month for each district and each officer a m N T a V) V E E rn m c m c 0 Mn 0 c E E v U O C W d a 0 v 0 c v `m c v m c A u7 m W c d E U U N Q Matrix Consulting Group Page 99 PacketPg. 760 B.A.a CITY OF SAN BERNARDINO, CALIFORNIA Management Study of the Code Enforcement Division u The Division generated its first monthly performance report in September 2011. 0 d The report was 44-pages long. 0 T The purpose of measurement is to improve performance. It is part of a N continuous cycle of measurement-based program planning, resource allocation, d E d program or policy execution, and evaluation that focuses on the use of performance R measurement information to identify what works and what does not.21 This requires 0 N N transparency. That transparency will not be achieved with a 44-page monthly report. o 0 The principle of transparency means that information is not only easy to access, N but also that it is complete, well organized, easy to use, and easy to understand. A 44- N page monthly report is not easy to use and easy to understand. Information that is understood only by a small group does little to foster transparency and understanding. E E The report is far too long to effectively communicate results to management and to the rn M c public. 0 0 An effective performance reporting system should consider the following: 'o Limit the number of code enforcement measures that are developed and used to key high-level indicators or measuring what matters, and eliminate data that isn't E regularly used to inform management decisions; 0 J c Ensure that code enforcement performance measures, objectives, and goals w d have clear linkages — the measures should clearly indicate outcomes related to $ the goals and objectives; v 0 c • Define programs (i.e., single-family rental inspection, property maintenance, A etc.) within the Division, and assigning measures to the major ones; F m • Report the performance of the Division on a monthly basis to enable meaningful y analysis to inform decision-making and intelligently allocate resources; and m m 2' National Performance Management Advisory Commission, A Performance Management Framework v for State and Local Government: From Measurement and Reporting to Management and Improving, E 2010 6 Matrix Consulting Group Page 100 PackeE Etg:r761'.` 8A.a CITY OF SAN BERNARDINO, CALIFORNIA Management Study of the Code Enforcement Division a 0 0 • Track the performance measures over time, and don't change measures each 0 year.22 0 T A possible monthly performance report for the Division follows this page. It is rn intended to be limited in length to two (2) to three (3) pages. E v Recommendation #14: The Code Enforcement Division should develop a two (2) to three (3) page monthly performance measurement report that effectively communicates results generated by the Division to management and to the public. N 4. THE CODE ENFORCEMENT DIVISION SHOULD TRACK PERFORMANCE v AGAINST OBJECTIVES AND MONITOR THE WORKLOAD AND o PERFORMANCE FOR CODE COMPLIANCE OFFICERS. d c Management information reports generated by systems such as GOEnforce capture the detailed information about staff productivity and Division performance to T 'O monitor workload, balance assignments and evaluate internal operations. GOEnforce N should be utilized to track and report the following information: E v rn Division workload; Case tracking; `o An Elapsed times for the initial site visit and closure of cases; o Work in backlog; and E m 0 • Personnel productivity. W The second exhibit following this page represents the corresponding o O management reports the Division needs to generate on a regular basis and utilize to a 5 manage workload and performance of the Division and its Code Compliance Officers. v m m N M m c d 22 Association of Government Accountants, State and Local Government's Use of Performance E Measures to Improve Service Delivery. v m Q Matrix Consulting Group Page 101 Packet Pg.762 8.A.a CITY OF SAN BERNARDINO,CALIFORNIA Management Study of the Code Enforcement Division Exhibit 9 (1) 0 s Possible Monthly Performance Report o 0 q This Fiscal Last Fiscal This Last Year-To- Year-To- m Performance Measure Month Month Date Date m Property Maintenance d rn #of New Cases Opened n #of Closed Cases � #of Cases Closed Voluntaril o #of Cases Closed through Forced '0 Compliance " #of Cases Closed as Unfounded/No Violation C 0 #of Cases Closed Voluntarily/#of Cases Closed w #of Cases Forced Compliance I#of Cases Closed rr #of Cases Unfounded or No Violation/#of Cases r Closed d, #of Closed Cases/#of Open Cases N #of Proactive Cases Opened v 3 Proactive Cases Opened/New Cases Opened m Avg. Open Caseload Per Officer m #of Highest Open Caseload Assigned to an Officer E #of Lowest Open Caseload Assigned to an Officer m Avg.Age of Open Cases from Date Case Opened) Avg. Days to First Site Visit from Date Case Opened 0 Avg. Days to Voluntary Closure of Case(from Date Case Opened) Avg. Days to Forced Closure of Case(from Date Case Opened) m Single-Family Rental Inspection E 0 #of New Cases Opened `0 #of Closed Cases w #of Cases Closed Voluntarilya #of Cases Closed through Forced U Com liance 0 c #of Cases Closed as Unfounded/No v Violation A c #of Cases Closed Voluntarily/#of Cases Closed d m #of Cases Forced Compliance/#of Cases Closed #of Cases Unfounded or No Violation/#of Cases rn Closed m #of Closed Cases/#of Open Cases w #of Proactive Cases Opened d O Proactive Cases Opened/New Cases O ened m Q Matrix Consulting Group Page 102 PackiitPg.763 S.A.a CITY OF SAN BERNARDINO,CALIFORNIA Management Study of the Code Enforcement Division _ m © Exhibit 9 (2) L) s This Fiscal Last Fiscal This Last Year-To- Year-To- o Performance Measure Month Month Data Date Single-Family Rental Inspection Cont'd rn Avg. Open Caseload Per Officer v #of Highest Open Caseload Assigned to an Officer E m #of Lowest Open Caseload Assigned to an Officer m m Avg.Age of Open Cases from Date Case Opened) � Avg. Days to First Site Visit from Date Case Opened o Avg. Days to Voluntary Closure of Case (from Date Case Opened) Avg. Days to Forced Closure of Case(from Date Case Opened) 0 Multi-Family Rental Inspection m #of New Cases Opened w #of Closed Cases #of Cases Closed VoluntarilyO1 #of Cases Closed through Forced Compliance v #of Cases Closed as Unfounded/No ' Violation u) ® c #of Cases Closed Voluntarily/#of Cases Closed E #of Cases Forced Compliance/#of Cases Closed #of Cases Unfounded or No Violation/#of Cases Closed #of Closed Cases/#of Open Cases c 0 #of Proactive Cases Opened Proactive Cases Opened/New Cases Opened o Avg. Open Caseload Per Officer d #of Highest Open Caseload Assigned to an Officer E U #of Lowest Open Caseload Assigned to an Officer `o Avg.Age of Open Cases from Date Case Opened) w Avg. Days to First Site Visit from Date Case Opened Avg. Days to Voluntary Closure of Case (from Date poi Case Opened) o c Avg. Days to Forced Closure of Case(from Date 'v Case Opened) m c v m c m N m w c v E L U m Q Matrix Consulting Group Page 103 Packetpg.764 i- 8.A.a CITY OF SAN BERNARDINO, CALIFORNIA Management Study of the Code Enforcement Division m Exhibit 9 (3) 0 t This Fiscal Last Fiscal This Last Year-To- Year-To- O Performance Measure Month Month Date Date 3 Crime Free Multi-Family Housing in Number of classes conducted v Number of hours of class training provided Number of owners/managers attending class training %of all owners/manages that have attended class training %of all properties inspected to verify implementation of CPTED elements/standards c 0 y d N OI N T 'O J N C ® O E rn n c G O M 0 C U E v U O L W d a O U O c �c `m c `u Itl c m y m m c m E z U A Q Matrix Consulting Group Page 104 '.'.Packet Pg.765 S.A.a CITY OF SAN BERNARDINO, CALIFORNIA Management Study of the Code Enforcement Division m ® Exhibit 10 (1) 0 L Recommended Management Reports o For the Code Enforcement Division a 3 V) Report Name Frequency/Distribution Report Data E a Workload distribution Monthly to Division managers Monthly volume counts of open m and supervisors cases by type for the entire Division .. 0 ti Workload Report—New Cases Monthly to Division managers Information by Code Compliance � and supervisors Officer and geographical area including date submitted, date assigned, and last milestone 0 N Workload Report—Open Cases Monthly to Division managers Information by Code Compliance z and supervisors Officer and geographical area including date opened, date assigned, and last milestone or N activity including the type of activityT D 3 Workload Report—Closed Monthly to Division managers Information by Code Compliance rn Cases and supervisors Officer and geographical area m including date opened and date E the case was closed and the a basis for closure i.e., voluntarily c complied n c Case Status Report Monthly to Division managers Case information by case °- and supervisors number, open date, Code Compliance Officer assigned, o and geographical area assigned, and last milestone or E activity including the type of activity o C LU Elapsed Processing Time Report Monthly to Division managers Information by Code Compliance —Open Cases and supervisors Officer and geographical area 0 including date the case was U opened, cycle time objective for case closure, days case has =o been opened, and last milestone m c d Elapsed Processing Time Report Monthly to Division managers Information by Code Compliance m —Closed Cases and supervisors Officer and geographical area a including date opened, cycle time objective, closure date,total M days from open to close. c 0 E O L U A Q Matrix Consulting Group Page 105 Packet Pg. 766 B.A.a CITY OF SAN BERNARDINO, CALIFORNIA Management Study of the Code Enforcement Division Exhibit 10 (2) 0 L Report Name Frequency/Distribution Report Data 0 T a Elapsed Processing Time Report Monthly to Division managers Information by Code Compliance ' N —Cases Overdue and supervisors Officer and geographical area � including date submitted, cycle m time objective, days into process E and last milestone m c m Caseload Assignment and Monthly to Division managers All caseload information and Distribution Report and supervisors Code Compliance Officer and c geographical area assigned and by case type Code Compliance Officer Monthly to Division managers Elapsed processing time by c 0 Performance Report and supervisors Code Compliance Officer and geographical area assigned, including new cases assigned, X open cases, closed cases, N overdue cases, and % o, processed within cycle time objectives. a in c v E Mm c m c O y 0 C O E d U O C W d a 0 U O C a N C N m C N N m M C N E L U R Q Matrix Consulting Group Page 106 Packet Pg. 767 CITY OF SAN BERNARDINO, CALIFORNIA Management Study of the Code Enforcement Division m The manager and supervisors of the Division should be held accountable for 0 W using information within GOEnforce to manage the workload and performance of the w 0 T Division and the performance of its Code Compliance Officers. The management Ul reports that the project team has outlined in this report are a beginning to better d E m understanding the productivity and workload volume in the Division A Recommendation #15: The Code Enforcement Division manager and supervisors should develop a number of monthly management information reports using GOEnforce to track performance against objectives for first site visits after a case has been opened, for closure of cases, and to monitor the case workload and performance Code Compliance Officers. `_ 0 Recommendation #16: The manager and supervisors of the Code Enforcement Division should be held accountable for using information within GOEnforce to w manage the workload and performance of the Division and the performance of its ;, Code Compliance Officers. T 5. CODE COMPLIANCE OFFICERS SHOULD NOT CLOSE CASES WITHOUT n SUPERVISORY REVIEW AND APPROVAL. d E As noted previously, 2,059 cases that did not receive an inspection in the field in rn M 2010 were excluded from the analysis. These cases included single-family rentals that 2 C 0 were closes as 'closed-not rental', closed with no inspection and no explanation for the 0 inspection not being performed or with the cases being closed as "done" with no E E inspection; commercial cases being closed as "closed-void", 'closed-unfounded", 0 C "closed-ACP notice", etc.; building code violations closed with no inspection and u 0 0 "closed-void", 'closed-unfounded", "closed-refer", etc. The distribution of these cases c c by type is presented in the table below. R d Type of Case Number of Cases in 2010 m Building Code Violation 17 m Commercial Enforcement 39 N Hazardous Condition 61 m� Multi-family 14 Property Maintenance 294 v Rental Inspection 1,542 E 0 m x 6 Matrix Consulting Group Page 107 Packet Pg.766 ': CITY OF SAN BERNARDINO, CALIFORNIA Management Study of the Code Enforcement Division a Type of Case Number of Cases in 2010 0 Sub-Standard Housin 63 O m Vehicle Abatement 29 Total 2,059 0 0 n Code Compliance Officers are closing cases with inadequate or any supervisory w c review and approval of the basis for case closure. This should not occur. E d rn A Any case within the Division should only be closed within the GOEnforce information system after supervisory review and approval. The Code Compliance N supervisors should ensure that there is sufficient documentation and basis for closing c any case. If there is insufficient documentation and basis for closing a case or errors in 2 d data entry, the case should be returned to the Code Compliance Officer for continued N work and effort to achieve full and complete closure of a case. N T Recommendation #17: The Code Compliance supervisors should review each and every case within GOEnforce to assure there is sufficient basis and documentation for closure. d E m Recommendation #18: If there is insufficient documentation and basis for closing a case or errors in data entry based upon supervisory review, the case should be returned to the Code Compliance Officer for continued work and effort c to achieve full and complete closure of a case. .2 .4 Recommendation #19: The Code Compliance supervisors should be held accountable for assuring that cases are only closed when all of the investigation E in the field, in the office, and all of the associated paperwork has been completed. $ `o 6. THE CODE COMPLIANCE SUPERVISORS AND CODE COMPLIANCE we OFFICERS SHOULD BE ASSIGNED RESPONSIBILITY FOR THE QUALITY OF THE DATA WITHIN THE GOENFORCE INFORMATION SYSTEM. 0 0 c Effective use of the GOEnforce automated information system is essential to the c effective management of service levels delivered by the Division and the productivity of m c m the staff of the Division. The staff of the Division should accurately enter data regarding w m cases into the GOEnforce automated information system for documentation and d E monitoring. This will assist in the tracking of repeat offenses at the same location, and A a Matrix Consulting Group Page 108 PacketPg>769 CITY OF SAN BERNARDINO, CALIFORNIA Management Study of the Code Enforcement Division d will also aid in the processing of the case from start to finish, providing a timeline for 0 d L case actions. 0 T However, a review of the data contained in the GOEnforce automated N information system during this analysis indicated that some of the data was inaccurate. d E w Examples are provided below. The dates entered for the closure of some cases were shown as occurring before the case was opened. In many instances, the gap was not significant (a mater of days), but in other instances it was a matter of a month or months and in one case almost 1 '/z years. a The dates for first inspection were shown as occurring before the case was opened. In some instances, the gap was almost nine (9) years. N The Matrix Consulting Group focused on the dates within GOEnforce since that ;, N data is critical to the documentation of the level of service delivered by the Division. v However, other key data elements within the GOEnforce information system should be m E quality controlled as well to assure sufficient documentation of the offense, the dates of "o m inspections and any actions taken, etc. The Code Compliance Officers should be held 2 c 0 accountable for the quality and completeness of the data entered into the GOEnforce 0 information system regarding their assigned cases. The Code Compliance supervisors d E should be held accountable for ensuring that the Code Compliance Officers assigned 0 `c to their team for supervision maintain the quality and completeness of data in the d a 0 GOEnforce information system regarding the cases assigned to their Code Compliance O 0 c a Officers. R 0 Recommendation #20: The Code Compliance Officers should be held m accountable for the quality and completeness of the data entered into the N GOEnforce information system regarding their assigned cases. Co Recommendation #21: The Code Compliance supervisors should be held accountable for ensuring that the Code Compliance Officers assigned to their E u m Q Matrix Consulting Group Page 109 Packet Pg.770" CITY OF SAN BERNARDINO, CALIFORNIA Management Study of the Code Enforcement Division 0 team for supervision maintain the quality and completeness of data in the u GOEnforce information system regarding the cases assigned to their Code t Compliance Officers. 0 T Recommendation #22: The Code Enforcement Division Manager should emphasize in formal written procedures the importance of keeping accurate data rn in GOEnforce, provide direction for proper records management, monitor v conditions and provide corrective action as needed. E o� R Recommendation #23: The Administrative Analyst for the Community Development Department should audit the quality of the data within the GOEnforce information system on a monthly basis and report the results to the Community Development Director. 7. THE CODE ENFORCEMENT DIVISION SHOULD DEVELOP A o PROCEDURES MANUAL TO GUIDE THE DAY-TO-DAY OPERATIONS AND .A ACTIONS OF THE DIVISION. N The Matrix Consulting Group reviewed existing Division procedures relative to N code enforcement, and compared the scope and content of these procedures with N metrics. d E As noted earlier, the Division has developed a procedure manual that defines m c program delivery methodology for staff of the Division. The manual is entitled 2 c 0 "Standard Procedures and Case Management." However, as noted earlier, this manual is has not been formally adopted and is not consistently utilized. In addition, the manual E is incomplete in some of its aspects. The manual, for example, has not defined 0 0 `c performance expectations i.e., Code Compliance Supervisors will assign new cases v v 0 within one (1) workday of receipt. The manual, for example, does not define how cases o c are to be prioritized. The manual, for example, does not define how the efforts of the d Division are to be coordinated with other departments or agencies such as the Police 00 c m N Department. ' m c d E L U N Q Matrix Consulting Group Page 110 Packet Pg.771 '. CITY OF SAN BERNARDINO, CALIFORNIA Management Study of the Code Enforcement Division m A comprehensive procedures manual that provides clear guidance to employees 0 d regarding their code enforcement related duties and responsibilities is a critical part of £ 0 an effective code enforcement management strategy. A procedures manual provides N Code Enforcement managers and supervisors, new employees, existing staff, and d E m Code Compliance Officers a consolidated guide to performing the tasks required to m deliver services in a cost-effective manner. 0 in Some of the subjects that the procedures manual should address are presented in the exhibit on the following page. In developing policies and procedures for the o N Division, the following approach should be utilized. N • Minimize. The procedures should be kept to a minimum. N • Best Methods. Make certain the procedure represents the "best method". This 9 means the procedure has undergone detailed analysis and is continually ti challenged. • Review and Revise. All procedures should be reviewed annually. o E m c • Keep Current. The problem with many procedures is that they have long ago E outlived their usefulness. No one remembers why the procedures were created o in the first place. Sometimes they contradict each other and create even more "- confusion. Responsibility for updating these procedures should be clear. o • Short is better than long. It is not the quantity, but the quality of information that v is the essential problem of the information age. 0 `c • Be ready to change. The key to organizational effectiveness and efficiency is d finding a better way. The Division must always be ready to challenge current g procedure —throw it out—change it. U 0 c • The procedures should be available on the Division's intranet site. This should facilitate easy updating. v m The Division's manager and supervisors should develop a procedures manual. N m d E r U N Q Matrix Consulting Group Page 111 Packet Pg. 772 S.A.a CITY OF SAN BERNARDINO, CALIFORNIA Management Study of the Code Enforcement Division d Exhibit 11 (1) U s Outline for a Procedures Manual o T D Procedure Procedure 2 No. Cate o Procedure Key Procedural Elements N 1 Administration What is Code Enforcement Defines the function and responsibility of the Division overall and the philosophy E of the Division in achieving compliance m i.e., enforce the code equitably and apply the level of enforcement that best g fits the type and circumstances of the code violation in order to achieve N compliance with the code 2 Administration Mission of Code Defines the mission of the Division i.e., Enforcement "partnering'with City residents and C businesses to build strong, sustainable 2 neighborhoods where people of all ages, .A ethnicities, lifestyles,and incomes choose to live, work, and play. w 3 Administration Interpretation Procedure interpretation by the Code Enforcement Division Manager N 4 Administration Amendments Amendments by the Code Enforcement Division Manager when deemed necessaryN 5 Administration Code Enforcement To include the City's philosophy © Philosophy regarding enforcement, the different E types of enforcement to be used, the v sequence of enforcement to be used, the criteria for choosing the types of enforcement, etc. 6 Administration Applicability The manual applies to all employees of o the Division 7 Code Code Enforcement Priorities To include a policy and the prioritization '- Enforcement criteria to be used for cases 8 Code Initiation of Code Documents the process for opening a E Enforcement Enforcement Case case including the timeline for v assignment of a case to a Code c Compliance Officer, the initiation of the case within GOEnforce,what data and w material must be included within the m a case folder in GOEnforce, etc. o U O S a R C d QI C R N Co m C d E r U Q Matrix Consulting Group Page 112 Packet Pg.773 8.A.a CITY OF SAN BERNARDINO,CALIFORNIA Management Study of the Code Enforcement Division m C Exhibit 11 (2) u Procedure Procedure .. No. Category Procedure Key Procedural Elements o a 9 Code The"Comprehensive" When investigating a complaint, the 'o Enforcement Approach to Enforcement Code Compliance Officer should m survey the subject property for all code violations that may be present. m The Code Compliance Officer should d do a"360 degree"survey of the properties surrounding the subject c parcel and cite any other violations as equitably as possible. The comprehensive approach is a .n proactive way to address problems within an assigned geographic area by the Code Compliance Officer C before they become a problem and, '0 y ideally, prior to receiving a citizen .� complaint. 10 Code Field and Case Investigation Documents the procedures for Enforcement investigating the case including a timeline a, for closing the case,the step-by-step procedures to be utilized in the investigation of the case, how to establish the elements of the violation, in responsibilities for coordination of cases c © with other City departments, how to investigate the case in the field, how to report the results of the investigation in GOEnforce, etc. 11 Code Enforcement Procedures The enforcement procedures to be utilized Enforcement including the step-by-step procedures to 0 be utilized for voluntary compliance and g forced compliance, how to issue a Notice p of Violation, how to issue administrative citations,ACP's,etc., how to issue d warrants in coordination with the Office of m the City Attorney, how to abate nuisances, o how to conduct hearings in coordination with the Office of the City Attorney,the w basis for fines, etc. o 12 Code Resolution of Code The basis for closing cases and the U Enforcement Violation Complaints responsibility of Code Compliance 0 Officers, Senior Code Compliance :o Officers, and Code Compliance m Supervisors in closing cases d U) c m u, to C U E U Q Matrix Consulting Group Page 113 Packet Pg. 774 S.A.a CITY OF SAN BERNARDINO, CALIFORNIA Management Study of the Code Enforcement Division m ® Exhibit 11 (3) u L Procedure Procedure No. Category Procedure Key Procedural Elements o T 13 Code Case Documentation How cases are to be documented within 'o Enforcement GOEnforce and the responsibility of Code m Compliance Officers, Senior Code Compliance Officers, and Code d Compliance Supervisors in maintaining E data quality and accuracy within R GOEnforce. The procedures should m include documentation of the case from case initiation, observed violations,field o inspections, case actions, issuance of ,v'n Notices of Violation,Administrative — Citations,etc., burden of proof, photographic evidence, etc. o 14 Code Community Outreach Responsibility for and the frequency of 'y Enforcement neighborhood association meetings, .� neighborhood cleanup events, news media relations,web site maintenance, etc. 15 Code Neighborhood Area Assignment of each Code Compliance N Enforcement Responsibility Officer to a specific geographic area in the City and their responsibility for handling all of the cases within that area. N 16 Code Proactive Enforcement Defines the responsibility of each c Enforcement Code Compliance Officer to be E proactive in their assigned specific m geographic area in the City in m identifying and resolving violations. A An effective approach to proactive enforcement is to observe 4 neighborhoods when driving from one A complaint to another. Code 2 Compliance Officers should always make note of obvious violations and w prioritize for follow-up. u In most assigned specific geographic o areas, there are less-travelled areas that receive few, if any complaints. W These areas should be canvassed a periodically by the Code Compliance U Officers to make sure the code is o enforced as equitably as possible a throughout the entire area. `m Overall,approximately 40%of the E caseload of each Code Compliance m Officer should be proactive/officer- `m initiated. yr Code Compliance Officers are m responsible for attending °p neighborhood meetings within their assigned specific geographic areas. E U (V U 3 a Matrix Consulting Group Page 114 Packet Pg.775 8.A.a CITY OF SAN BERNARDINO, CALIFORNIA Management Study of the Code Enforcement Division © Exhibit 11 (4) u v z Procedure Procedure No. Category Procedure Key ProceduralElements o 13 Code Prioritizing Workload Provides guidelines for prioritization of 3 Enforcement cases by Code Compliance Officers with rn the highest priority being citizen-initiated cases 14 Code Handling Invalid or The Code Compliance Officer should v Enforcement Frivolous Cases make an inspection of the subject m property, documenting the field inspection m by opening an activity in GOEnforce, providing a description of what was seen, o and choosing the unfound status. uu'i 15 Code When to Make a Personal Given the volume of complaints �- Enforcement Contact received by code enforcement, it is not always practical or possible to C establish personal contact with every '0 y individual responsible for remedying a .> violation. This is especially true with regard to weed and trash violations, inoperable motor vehicles, and routine Q, outdoor storage violations at rental `� properties or vacant lots. As a rule, when dealing with businesses open to the public, always io © contact the manager or owner first to make them aware of the violation prior to sending a Notice of Violation. rn 16 Code Property Maintenance Summary of property maintenance Enforcement Violations ordinances Guidelines for resolving violations of c property maintenance ordinances i.e., o issuing a Notice of Violation Ln Documentation required for property 'p maintenance violations regarding any inspections, pertinent conversations w with the property owner or tenant, and m any other auxiliary information 0 17 Code Single-Family Rental Summary of single-family rental � Enforcement Inspection Program inspection ordinance w Self-certification by the property a 0 owner U Guidelines for resolving violations of 0 single-family rental inspection :o ordinance i.e., issuing a Notice of Violation ` Documentation required for single- m family rental inspection violations regarding any inspections, pertinent ur conversations with the property owner aj or tenant, and any other auxiliary °J information c m © L U N Q Matrix Consulting Group Page 115 Packet Pg.776 CITY OF SAN BERNARDINO, CALIFORNIA Management Study of the Code Enforcement Division Exhibit 11 (5) 0 L Procedure Procedure No. Category Procedure Key Procedural Elements o T 18 Code Multi-Family Rental Summary of multi-family rental � Enforcement Inspection Program inspection ordinance rn Guidelines for resolving violations of multi-family rental inspection N ordinance i.e., issuing a Notice of E Violation Documentation required for multi- c family rental inspection violations regarding any inspections, pertinent c conversations with the property owner or tenant, and any other auxiliary — information 19 Code Crime-Free Multi-Family Summary of crime-tree multi-family Enforcement Housing ordinance '0� Guidelines for resolving violations of d crime-tree multi-family ordinance i.e., � issuing a Notice of Violation N Documentation required for crime-tree o, multi-family ordinance violations `7 regarding any inspections, pertinent conversations with the property owner or tenant, and any other auxiliary in © information Classes and classroom training m requirements rn Property inspection requirements to verify implementation of CPTED A elements/standards 20 Code Hearing Procedures Basic hearing process o Enforcement Dress code for hearings Mn What to bring to the hearing i.e., case G file, photographs showing the code violation, a chronological history of the v case including any extensions granted v and the basis for granting them, notes on conversations with the owner, w C tenants, property manager or others u associated with the case, and documentation of any progress that r j has been made toward compliance, o etc. c v Presentation tips 21 Code Community Development Grants and low interest loans E Enforcement Block Grant Assistance available to low and moderate income m homeowners by CDBG Basis for eligibility for grants and low U) interest loans available from CDBG m c d U U F Q Matrix Consulting Group Page 116 Packet.Pg.777 CITY OF SAN BERNARDINO, CALIFORNIA Management Study of the Code Enforcement Division v Recommendation #24: The Code Enforcement Division should develop a 0 procedures manual that contains, at a minimum, the procedures recommended in exhibit 11. 0 T Recommendation #25: The Division should establish a policies and procedures committee, consisting of five to seven staff, that includes a representation of rn staff at all levels in the Division to develop the procedures manual. d E d Recommendation #26: The Code Enforcement Division Manager should be assigned responsibility for development of the procedures manual working with the committee. 0 n in Recommendation #27: The Code Enforcement Division Manager should develop and implement procedures for monitoring, along with procedures for corrective action, to ensure compliance with the Division's procedures by the staff of the o Division. " v rr Recommendation #28: The Code Enforcement Division Manager should develop, w implement, and monitor a training plan for the staff of the Division to ensure the staff receive adequate education and training related to the Division's N procedures and the implementation and administration of these procedures. 0 7. THE CODE ENFORCEMENT DIVISION SHOULD WORK WITH THE POLICE AND THE FIRE DEPARTMENTS TO DEVELOP PROTOCOLS FOR MULTI- E DEPARTMENT SERVICE DELIVERY. rn m c Building strong, sustainable neighborhoods where people of all ages, ethnicities, 2 c 0 lifestyles, and incomes choose to live, work, and play is not something that the Code 0 Enforcement Division can accomplish on its own. Achieving that mission requires the E cooperation and assistance of a multiple number of departments (i.e., Police, Fire, 0 `c Office of the City Attorney, etc.) and agencies (i.e., County Health Department, etc.). w d 0 0 A proactive, multi-departmental response team is more effective in addressing u 0 c comprehensive neighborhood issues. Many other cities assign a multi-departmental c `m response team to address living conditions in a neighborhood as a whole. For example, 00 c m N each year, the City of San Antonio focuses on a neighborhood in each council district. m The code enforcement function coordinates a comprehensive package of city services c d E r 0 A Q Matrix Consulting Group Page 117 Packet Pgr778 " S.A:a CITY OF SAN BERNARDINO, CALIFORNIA Management Study of the Code Enforcement Division v to enhance the appearance of these neighborhoods and encourage long-term property u maintenance. This is an intense four-week concentration of the delivery of city services 0 T to these specific neighborhoods. Once the neighborhood is identified, community N meetings are conducted to assist residents in identifying priorities. Services include, E v but are not limited to, street repair, vacant lot clean up, brush collection and code inspections/corrections. 0 The City of San Bernardino has utilized such a multi-department approach r through Operation Phoenix. However, this program needs to be systemized as an $ .N ongoing basis that is focused on those neighborhoods most in need. N However, these other departments have voiced concerns regarding the ;, N effectiveness of the working relationship with the Code Enforcement Division. These $ concerns, noted reviousl chapter 4, are summarized below. P Y in P d E • The Code Enforcement Division should enhance its cooperation with the rn Police Department Homeless Advocacy Program. The effectiveness of the c working relationship can be enhanced through more effective communication, 2 the development of a protocol defining the roles and responsibilities of the Code o Enforcement Division and the Homeless Advocacy Program in the Police Department, better definition of the types of complaints that should and should o not be referred to the Homeless Advocacy Program in the Police Department by the Code Enforcement Division, periodic participation by the Code Enforcement E Division in briefings by the Police Department, etc. 0 w c • The Code Enforcement Division should enhance its cooperation with the w d Police Department in the administration of the Crime Free Ordinance. The g Code Enforcement Division should enhance its collaboration with the Police Department in the administration of the Crime Free Ordinance including evaluating existing aspects of the ordinance and its effectiveness, mutually selecting the apartments that are a high priority for initial administration of the d Crime Free ordinance, enhancing the training of landlords regarding effective m apartment management i.e. how to check references and credit worthiness, N participation by the Division in presentations to Neighborhood Watch groups, etc. Co v E r U R Q Matrix Consulting Group Page 118 PacketPg.779 S.A.a CITY OF SAN BERNARDINO, CALIFORNIA Management Study of the Code Enforcement Division v The Code Enforcement Division should make explicit the services, priorities and 0 responsibilities in the delivery of services involving more than itself. This includes the 0 T Homeless Advocacy Program, the administration of the Crime Free Ordinance, U) Operation Phoenix, and the inspection of multi-family residences. Written protocols v E v should be developed and adopted with the Police and the Fire departments. The protocol should be a written agreement designed to create a common understanding 0 N N about services, priorities and responsibilities between the Police and the Fire departments and the Code Enforcement Division as it pertains to the Homeless o N Advocacy Program, the administration of the Crime Free Ordinance, Operation N Phoenix, and the inspection of multi-family residences. A protocol is: ;, N • A communications tool. The value of the agreement is not just in the final a product; the very process of establishing a protocol helps to open up ' communications. • A conflict-prevention tool. An agreement helps to avoid or alleviate disputes E by providing a shared understanding of needs and priorities. And if conflicts do occur, they tend to be resolved more readily and with less gnashing of teeth. c 0 • A living document. This is one of its most important benefits. The agreement isn't a dead-end document consigned to the "Forget Forever" file. On a pre- is determined frequency, the managers of the Police and Fire departments and the d Code Enforcement Division should review the agreement to assess service E adequacy and make adjustments. 0 `c • An objective basis for gauging service effectiveness. The protocol ensures w that the managers of the Police and Fire departments and the Code o Enforcement Division use the same criteria to evaluate service quality and efficiency. v To be effective, the protocols should incorporate two elements: service elements m and management elements. The service elements clarify service level expectations by y communicating such things as: d M U Q Matrix Consulting Group Page 119 Packet Pg. 780 8.A.a CITY OF SAN BERNARDINO, CALIFORNIA Management Study of the Code Enforcement Division u • The services provided by the Code Enforcement Division, the Police and the 0 Fire departments (and also the services not provided); t • Conditions of service availability; v Service standards, such as the timeframes within which services will be rn provided; d E v The responsibilities of both parties; and A c m Change and scope of service change procedures. 0 N The management elements focus on such things as: • How service effectiveness will be tracked; $ 0 • How information about service effectiveness will be reported and addressed; N How service-related disagreements will be resolved; and ;, N How the Code Enforcement Division, and the Police and Fire departments will v review and revise the protocol. N The protocol should be utilized to enhance communication and working E E m relationships between the Code Enforcement Division and the Police and Fire m departments regarding the delivery of services pertaining to the Homeless Advocacy o .2 Program, the administration of the Crime Free Ordinance, Operation Phoenix, and the o c inspection of multi-family residences. E v U Recommendation #29: The Code Enforcement Division should develop and adopt written protocols with the Police and Fire departments regarding the u delivery of services pertaining to the Homeless Advocacy Program, the $ administration of the Crime Free Ordinance, Operation Phoenix, and the U 0 inspection of multi-family residences. 5 D A C N m a N N m G d E L u A Q Matrix Consulting Group Page 120 Packet(g.78t S.A.a CITY OF SAN BERNARDINO, CALIFORNIA Management Study of the Code Enforcement Division v 8. ANALYSIS OF CODES AND ORDINANCES d L This chapter presents an analysis of the codes and ordinances administered by o 9 the Code Enforcement Division. ' N C The City has recently modified the single-family rental inspection ordinance E E o, pertaining to self-certification and the frequency of inspection. Those changes bring the M frequency of inspection more within the parameters found within other cities, and also reflect common sense (i.e., why inspect those single-family rentals every year that c comply with maintenance standards within the ordinance). °- N i d The Matrix Consulting Group recommends further modifications of the single- K N family rental and multi-family rental ordinances and the adoption of an ordinance N T regarding foreclosures. in 1. THE CITY SHOULD ADOPT A FORECLOSURE ORDINANCE. d E m Vacant properties inflict problems on communities. They harbor crime, weaken A A surrounding property values, and create special maintenance challenges. The recent 0 .y surge of mortgage foreclosures has contributed to an even greater proliferation of > 0 vacant properties and the problems that come with them.23 Foreclosed properties can E E 0 pose a significant threat to community stability. The problems caused by these `o `c w properties include overgrown lawns, mosquitoes breeding in unmaintained pools, v 0 U opportunists stripping the homes for scrap metal and other valuable appliances and °c a components, squatters taking up residence and risking fire to get heat or electrical m M service, and gangs using the properties for illegal activities. In fact, foreclosed homes A N M ro za University of Texas School of Law, Community Development Clinic, Texas Problem Properties Toolkit: d A Resource To help Texas Communities Address Problems Created by Vacant and Abandoned E Properties, 2010 u m Q Matrix Consulting Group Page 121 Packet Pg.782 CITY OF SAN BERNARDINO, CALIFORNIA Management Study of the Code Enforcement Division d reduce the property value of surrounding properties. A number of studies have found 0 0 that houses on blocks with abandoned homes sold for less than houses on blocks with w 0 T no abandonment.242526 There is a direct correlation between crime and vacant and/or Ul abandoned properties that results in the deterioration of housing stock and 0 E d neighborhoods by spurring disinvestment.27 In Austin, Texas, blocks with vacant m buildings had 3.2 times as many drug calls to police, 1.8 times as many theft calls, and 0 N N twice the number of calls for violent behavior as those neighborhoods without vacant properties.28 Annually, there is over $73 million in property damage as a result of more .2 than 12,000 fires in abandoned structures. Homeowners within close proximity to N abandoned properties are often charged higher insurance premiums or even face N policy cancellations because of the unstable nature of the neighborhood created by the a vacant properties. Moreover, a 2008 study that examined the impacts of vacant and E E abandoned properties in eight (8) Ohio cities found that these properties cost A c communities $15 million annually in city service costs, including the costs of code 2 c 0 enforcement, demolition and boarding of buildings, property maintenance, and police 0 and fire runs. What's more, in the seven (7) of the eight (8) cities for which data was E available, lost tax revenue totaled nearly $49 million. 29 0 `c w d 0 0 U O C 2" Pittsburgh Economic Quarterly, University of Pittsburgh, June 2009 25 Furman Center for Real Estate and Urban Policy, New York University, Foreclosed Properties in NYC: c A Look at the Last 15 Years, January 2010 d 26 Living Cities. "Communities At Risk: How the Foreclosure Crisis is Damaging Urban Areas and What m is Being Done About it."Washington, D.C.: Living Cities, December 2009. N 2' Christiana Mcfarland & William McGahan, National League Of Cities, Housing Finance And Foreclosure Crisis: Local Impacts And Responses, 2008. se United States Conference Of Mayors, Vacant And Abandoned Properties: Survey And Best Practices, 2008. v 21 Community Research Partners, $60 Million And Counting: The Cost Of Vacant And Abandoned E Properties To Eight Ohio Cities, 2008. 0 m Q Matrix Consulting Group Page 122 PacketPg. 783 CITY OF SAN BERNARDINO, CALIFORNIA Management Study of the Code Enforcement Division v In addition, a frequent concern expressed by the customers interviewed by the 0 d Matrix Consulting Group was that the Division needed to enhance its effectiveness in `0 T assuring that the banks that own the foreclosed home adequately maintained Co foreclosed homes. m E m The adoption of ordinances by other cities to address problems with foreclosed A A hones is not uncommon. Three (3) of the seven (7) cities included in the comparative 0 N survey conducted as part of this management study adopted foreclosure ordinances. This includes the cities of Riverside, Ontario, and Santa Ana. Important points to note `o .2 regarding these programs are presented below. N Riverside and Santa Ana have adopted foreclosure ordinances that hold titleholders accountable for the upkeep of residential properties while they are vacant. a v 0 Ontario adopted a more comprehensive foreclosure ordinance that (1) includes in c a requirement to register properties with the City if these properties are vacant E and abandoned, (2) holds titleholders accountable for the upkeep of residential o properties while they are vacant, and (3) requires mortgage companies are also c required to hire a local company to inspect the property on a weekly basis. c 0 San Bernardino has not adopted a foreclosure ordinance. 'c The San Bernardino Economic Development Agency noted in its Neighborhood c d E Stabilization Program Three grant application that of the 200 neighborhoods identified 0 in the United States Department of Housing and Urban Development's (HUD) u, d 0 0 database as being completely within the boundaries of the City of San Bernardino, u 0 c 89.5% received a score indicating the greatest need for foreclosure relief according to d HUD's scoring system. The grant application further noted that, in November of 2010, m c M the City of San Bernardino had a foreclosure rate approximately three times the rate for w m c E E r v m Q Matrix Consulting Group Page 123 PaeketPg:784 '. CITY OF SAN BERNARDINO, CALIFORNIA Management Study of the Code Enforcement Division v the country as a whole and one and one-half times the rate for the state of California.30 d Some of the city's neighborhoods have substantial problems with foreclosure. For w 0 T example, the neighborhood at the intersection of Baseline and Waterman Avenue has N 3,027 housing units and of these, approximately 27 percent are in foreclosure or are 90 d E d days or more delinquent. R The Code Enforcement Division and the Office of the City Attorney should work 0 N N together in the development of a foreclosure ordinance for the consideration of the Mayor and City Council. The Code Enforcement Division should be responsible for the a .y j administration of the ordinance; the Division has more than sufficient authorized N positions to administer the ordinance. A N The recommended elements of the foreclosure ordinance, based upon an v ordinance adopted by the City of Chula Vista, include the following: n d E The ordinance should require lenders to act on the "Abandonment and rn Waste" clause within their mortgage contract. This clause gives lenders the c authority to enter onto vacant abandoned property in which they hold a 2 beneficial interest and secure and maintain the property against vandalism and a deterioration. Although most lenders agree this clause provides them the right to 20 maintain the property, they state it does not provide an obligation to do so. The o ordinance adopted by the City should make acting on the clause a requirement. d E • The ordinance should require that the lenders register the vacant abandoned property with the City (and pay a fee). The lender should be required to hire a local property management / maintenance company to w maintain the vacant abandoned ert ro p p y, and post their name and contact 0 number on the vacant abandoned property. U 0 c The City of Ontario has included these elements within their own foreclosure ordinance F v as has the City of Chula Vista. m N m m c m so San Bernardino Economic Development Agency, Neighborhood Stabilization Program Three, E Substantial Amendment to the Consolidated Annual Action Plan for Fiscal Year 2010-11, March 2011 u m Q Matrix Consulting Group Page 124 Packet Pg.:785' CITY OF SAN BERNARDINO, CALIFORNIA Management Study of the Code Enforcement Division u The biggest challenge the City will face will be notifying the multi-national 0 W lending / foreclosure industry regarding the local ordinance and program, locating the w 0 T current beneficiaries of the mortgages on properties in violation. Locating the current w beneficiaries of mortgages is one of the single largest obstacles in dealing with E m financially distressed properties. Often, mortgage loans are issued, and then the A beneficial interest is sold to another company / lender, security or trust, and that 0 N N transfer is not recorded. Without a recorded transfer or substitution of beneficiary, the local jurisdiction has no way to contact the individual or corporation that has authority `o 2 over the property. N A challenge will not be providing adequate staffing. The Code Enforcement m N Division has more than adequate staffing to administer this ordinance, particularly if it v allocates resources intelligently (i.e., not inspecting single-family residences and d E apartments every year that comply with property maintenance standards). "o c Recommendation #30: The Code Enforcement Division and the Office of the City 2 Attorney should work together in the development of a foreclosure ordinance for c the consideration of the Mayor and City Council. 'o Recommendation #31: The Code Enforcement Division should be responsible for v the administration of the ordinance; the Division has more than sufficient E authorized positions to administer the ordinance. 0 w c Recommendation #32: The ordinance should require lenders to act on the w m "Abandonment and Waste" clause within their mortgage contract. o U Recommendation #33: The ordinance should require that the lenders register the =_ vacant abandoned property with the City. A c d Recommendation #34: The City should adopt a fee to recover the costs for m administration of the foreclosure ordinance. cn in m c a E L u m Q Matrix Consulting Group Page 125 PacketPg.786'' CITY OF SAN BERNARDINO, CALIFORNIA Management Study of the Code Enforcement Division v 2. THE SINGLE-FAMILY RENTAL INSPECTION AND MULTI-FAMILY RENTAL o INSPECTION ORDINANCES SHOULD BE MODIFIED. L The City has recently modified the single-family rental inspection ordinance 0 v pertaining to self-certification and the frequency of inspection. Those changes bring the n m frequency of inspection more within the parameters found within other cities, and also E m A reflect common sense (i.e., why inspect those single-family rentals every year that comply with maintenance standards within the ordinance). The comparative survey conducted by the Matrix Consulting Group as part of v C 0 this management study found that two cities — Ontario and Santa Ana — have d m established single-family and multi-family rental inspection programs. A third city - N d Pasadena - inspects multi-family rentals. Important points to note regarding the single- T 'O family and multi-family rental inspection programs in Ontario, Pasadena, and Santa N c Ana are noted below. E E rn Ontario and Santa Ana inspect single-family rentals on a cycle of once every Cc four years. San Bernardino has inspected single-family rentals on a cycle of once annually. The revised ordinance will now provide for the inspection of o single-family rentals once every three years once the property is self-certified. N c Ontario, Pasadena, and Santa Ana inspect multi-family rentals on a cycle of a once every four years. San Bernardino inspects multi-family rentals on a cycle of E once annually. `o w c A high proportion of San Bernardino's housing stock is rental. In fact, 49.7% of a 0 0 the housing units in San Bernardino in 2010 were rental units based on data provided u 0 c by the United States Census Bureau. Inspection of single-family and multi-family d rentals is a best practice for those cities in which a high proportion of their housing m m m stock is single family or multi-family rentals.31 Cities have had success with registration m m d 31 University of Texas School of Law, Community Development Clinic, Building Hope: Tools for E Transforming Abandoned and Blighted Properties into Community Assets, December 2007 0 m Q Matrix Consulting Group Page 126 PacketPg.787 CITY OF SAN BERNARDINO, CALIFORNIA Management Study of the Code Enforcement Division m systems, which require landlords to register their rental properties, provide contact 0 0 information for a central database, and obtain licensing or occupancy permits. Rental 0 T registration also provides cities with expanded opportunities to inspect the property and y educate owners about their responsibilities as property owners and landlords. d E d However, San Bernardino is inspecting its single-family rentals and multi-family c rentals more frequently than Ontario, Santa Ana and Pasadena. The frequency of 0 N inspection should be based upon the problems and results of inspections conducted by the Division, and not a standard 'one size fits all." After all, in 2010, a little more than o .2 62% of the inspections of single-family rentals found no violations, and a little more IX N than 60% of the inspections of multiple-family rentals found no violations. It is clearly a N waste of resources to inspect all single-family rentals and multi-family rentals with the 3 same frequency. The frequency should be tailored to the violations found. If no in c d violations are found, then the frequency should be lengthened. The frequency should E c be determined by the conditions of the building and estimates of the risk of 2 c 0 deterioration. 2 'o The Code Enforcement Division should develop a consistent, yet individualized E approach for the systematic inspection of single-family rentals and multi-family rentals 0 c based on historical data regarding violations and previous inspections, and establish w d 0 0 review periods of from one to four years depending on those conditions. For multi- L) 0 c family rentals, an additional criterion could be meeting the CPTED elements / c d standards. The Division should, in a sense, triage properties focusing inspections on M c m those in greatest distress. N m c w E t U A Q Matrix Consulting Group Page 127 Packet Pgr78tl' B.A,a CITY OF SAN BERNARDINO, CALIFORNIA Management Study of the Code Enforcement Division v The Matrix Consulting Group recommends modifications of the single-family 0 0 rental and multi-family rental ordinances. The ordinances should require that single- `0 T family rentals and multi-family rentals be inspected not less than once every four years, y but that inspection frequency should be based upon historical data regarding violations v E d and previous inspections, with inspection frequency based upon those conditions. In c other words, those properties in greatest need could be inspected more than once a 0 N H year, while those properties that meet maintenance standards should be inspected once every four years. Those properties that meet maintenance standards should be o .2 self-certified automatically and inspected once every four years. The fees charged to N single-family rentals and multi-family rentals should be based upon that frequency i.e., o6 N a higher frequency pays a higher fee reflecting the cost of that frequency of inspection, v 3 while a lower frequency of inspection pays a lower fee. v E Recommendation #35: The single-family rental and multi-family rental rn ordinances should require that single-family rentals and multi-family rentals be "c inspected not less than once every four years, but that inspection frequency 2 should be based upon historical data regarding violations and previous o inspections, with inspection frequency based upon those conditions. . a Recommendation #36: The single-family rental and multi-family rental properties that meet maintenance standards should be self-certified automatically and E inspected once every four years. 0 w c Recommendation #37: The fees charged to single-family rentals and multi-family w rentals should be based upon the frequency of inspection i.e., a higher c frequency pays a higher fee reflecting the cost of that frequency of inspection, U 0 while a lower frequency of inspection pays a lower fee. E 9 N 3. THE CODE ENFORCEMENT DIVISION SHOULD COMPLY WITH THE SIGN REGULATIONS ADOPTED BY THE CITY. m Section 19.22.140 of the Sign Regulations require that "within 6 months from the N m date of the adoption of this Development Code, the City shall commence a program to c d E r U A Q Matrix Consulting Group Page 128 PacketPg.789 ' CITY OF SAN BERNARDINO, CALIFORNIA Management Study of the Code Enforcement Division v inventory and identify illegal or abandoned signs within its jurisdiction. Within 60 days 0 v after this 6-month period, the City shall commence abatement of identif=ied illegal or 0 T abandoned signs." w This ordinance was adopted more than ten (10) years ago. The Code az E 0 Enforcement Division has yet to comply with the requirements of the Sign Regulations. M 2 This is not a problem with the adequacy of staffing. The Division has more than 0 n N sufficient staffing to complete the inventory and abate illegal or abandoned signs. The Code Enforcement Division Manager and the Code Compliance supervisors, $ .2 should be held accountable for assuring that the Division complies with the N requirements of the Sign Regulations, that the Division completes an inventory of N illegal or abandoned signs, and that the Division abates illegal or abandoned signs v within 60-days after the completion of the inventory. n Y P rY d E Recommendation #38: The Code Enforcement Division should complete an o inventory of illegal or abandoned signs by June 30, 2012. m Recommendation #39: The manager and supervisors of the Code Enforcement o Division should be held accountable for assuring that the Division complies with Ln the requirements of the Sign Regulations, that the Division completes an 'o inventory of illegal or abandoned signs, and that the Division abates illegal or abandoned signs within 60-days after the completion of the inventory. E 0 4. THE CODE ENFORCEMENT DIVISION SHOULD CONDUCT REGULAR REVIEWS OF THE ORDINANCES THAT IT ENFORCES IN CONCERT WITH u, v THE OFFICE OF THE CITY ATTORNEY. c U Most ordinances are the products of decades of changes. Unfortunately, when c 9 c M new policies are added or changed, they often create inconsistencies in the ordinance v m or are not clear and objective in their intent or application. This leads to various N interpretations. ca E E r U A Q Matrix Consulting Group Page 129 Packet Pg.790: CITY OF SAN BERNARDINO, CALIFORNIA Management Study of the Code Enforcement Division 0 The Code Enforcement Division should conduct regular reviews and updates of 0 0 the ordinances that it enforces to address these inconsistencies or lack of clarity, and `o T involve interest groups (e.g., landlords, chamber of commerce, neighborhood yr associations, etc.), affected by the ordinances in these reviews and updates. E v The purpose of these periodic reviews is to determine whether these ordinances A should be modified for purposes of: 0 N h • Improving the clarity of the ordinances; Enhancing the ease of administration of the ordinances; $ 0 • Increasing the fairness and consistency of treatment of those found in violation of the ordinances; N o� • Clarifying the standards for maintenance of property; N T V • Simplifying the ordinances; ' rn • Enhance the organization of the ordinances; £ d m • Clarifying definitions or troublesome terms in the ordinances that may be vague c or not fully explained or are legal jargon; c 0 • Clarifying the goals or purposes of the ordinances; 2 0 The Division is not conducting such periodic reviews with interest groups. d E The Division should conduct such reviews, not less than once every five years, 0 using the criteria noted in the table below (among others) to evaluate the ordinances w d 0 0 enforced by the Division. U 0 c v m 1 The language of the ordinance is understandable by anon-technical audience. E v m 2. The text should be efficiently organized. c m y 3. Goals and purposes should be clearly laid out. [0 m 4. Enforcement procedures should be clear, timely and relevant. d 5. Standards for property maintenance should be clear, timely and relevant. r U N Q Matrix Consulting Group Page 130 ,Packet Pg.",741` CITY OF SAN BERNARDINO, CALIFORNIA Management Study of the Code Enforcement Division v 0 0 6. Appropriate officials should be available to answer questions. m z 7. Property maintenance standards should provide accurate and useful information. `o 8. Laws and regulations should be written to accomplish the desired results.. N 9. Laws and regulations should be based upon community-wide goals as stated in the General Plan. E v Land use regulations enforced by the Code Enforcement Division, more than A c A any other type of local law, have the most profound affect upon the daily life of the 0 average citizen of San Bernardino and, as such, care must be taken whenever changes are made. The only adequate way to address this issue is to make sure that o An the public is fully informed about the need for any ordinance change, fully involved in N making these changes, and that ample time and opportunity is provided to collect N public opinion and ideas. v Initially, the Matrix Consulting Group would suggest that the Division work with ur the business community, the Chamber of Commerce, and the Planning Division in the c review of the existing Sign Regulations. c 0 Recommendation #40: The Code Enforcement Division should conduct regular reviews of the ordinances that it enforces in concert with the Office of the City c Attorney. d E Recommendation #41: The Division should initially work with the business v community, the Chamber of Commerce, and the Planning Division in the review 2 of the existing Sign Regulations in fiscal year 2012-13. W m 0 0 U 0 c 9 A c d m C N N m m C d E L U N Q Matrix Consulting Group Page 131 PacketPg.:792'. S.A`a CITY OF SAN BERNARDINO, CALIFORNIA Management Study of the Code Enforcement Division m 9. ANALYSIS OF TRAINING AND CERTIFICATION v There are a number of elements to talent management. The elements include o T 9 organizational strategy (i.e., career development systems, etc.), acquisition (i.e., N c recruitment and selection, etc.), development (i.e., managerial and supervisory training, E v M employee training, staff development and mentoring, etc.), and retention (i.e., classification and compensation, etc.). Learning and development of talent is a critical n element to effective code enforcement service delivery, yet one in which the Division is largely ineffective. The gaps in training include managerial and supervisory training, 2 .A d skill development, problem solving, team building, and communication. N 1. THE MANAGER AND SUPERVISORS OF THE CODE ENFORCEMENT N DIVISION SHOULD DEVELOP AN ANNUAL TRAINING PLAN FOR ITS a EMPLOYEES. y The Malcolm Baldrige National Quality Award contains a number of criteria d E d regarding organizational excellence. One of the criteria is a human resources focus m that includes employee education, training, and career development that build 0 employee knowledge, skills, and capabilities.32 0 The American Society of Training and Development reported in their 2010 E E u ASTD State of the Industry. that the average annual learning expenditure per `o C w employee for all companies surveyed amounted to $1,081 in 2009..33 0 0 U The Code Enforcement Division budgeted $18,700 in FY 2011-12 for meetings 0 'v and conferences and education and training. This amounts to $534 per employee or d m 49% of the metric identified by the American Society of Training and Development. N This is not to suggest that the only solution to employee education, training, and m d 33 Baldrige National Quality Program, 2009-10 Criteria for Performance Excellence, 2008 E 33 American Society of Training and Development, 2010 ASTD State of the Industry Report, 2011. 0 Q Matrix Consulting Group Page 132 Packet Pg.793 :' S.A.a CITY OF SAN BERNARDINO, CALIFORNIA Management Study of the Code Enforcement Division a career development is an increased budget for employee training. There is work that 0 d needs to be done before increasing that budget. `o T First, the manager and the supervisors of the Division should develop a formal, in written training program and plan to address the skill development and training needs d E m of the staff of the Division. Development and execution of a well-conceived training program and plan is the cornerstone upon which a successful training program rests. A 0 training plan exists on at least two levels: • Division-wide - encompassing the entire Division and covering a relatively o elastic time period of several years (this is a reflection of a strategic plan or overall set of goals) N • Employee-specific - describing the training needs of employees within the ;, Division and covering a discrete fiscal or calendar time frame (this is a reflection N of concrete, measurable goals and objectives) T in v ('' In developing a training plan, the Division is linking the skill development of its �rr� E employees to its own strategic plan and an assessment of its strengths and o, m weaknesses. The Division should strive to achieve the best practices presented below 2 c 0 in developing this training plan. A 0 The Division provides a comprehensive staff development program to achieve and maintain c high levels of productivity and employee performance. w E The Division plans training programs based on Division-wide needs assessment that includes input u from employees and their supervisors at least every other year. `o The Division establishes and implements formal staff development plans to provide on-going training w for employees. .1 The Division has procedures to evaluate individual in-service training activities, including employee o feedback, and to evaluate the extent to which annual training efforts have met identified long-term U training objectives. co The Division provides a comprehensive staff development program for managers and supervisors. m c All managers and supervisors have completed (or anticipate completing within the current fiscal year) m management and supervisory training programs. c The Division has a process for identifying employees with the potential for employment in managerial rn and/or supervisory positions, and for providing training to them prior to appointment to a managerial and/or supervisory osition. m m c v L v Q Matrix Consulting Group Page 133 Packet Pg. 794 8.A.a l CITY OF SAN BERNARDINO, CALIFORNIA Management Study of the Code Enforcement Division m The Code Enforcement Division Manager should direct supervisors within the 0 0 Division to develop a formal written training program and plan. This should include the 0 T development of a Division procedure regarding professional development and training. N This procedure should clarify responsibility for ensuring that employees receive training 0 E 0 and development, the responsibility for requesting funding for training and 0 A development, and the responsibility for the preparation of a formal, written professional 0 in development and training program that identifies the appropriate levels of training for each classification, including training to enhance employees' skills and improve `o N performance in their current position. This should include ongoing training by the City N Planner and the Office of the City Attorney regarding how the ordinances enforced by N the Code Enforcement Division, how to interpret these ordinances, how to present cases for hearing officers, how to prepare requests for warrants, etc. d E In addition, the Community Development Director and the Code Enforcement m Division Manager should develop managerial and supervisory training plans for the 2 c 0 Code Enforcement Division Manager and Code Compliance supervisors. The training v plans should be focused on managerial and supervisory training and skill development. v E Recommendation #42: The Code Enforcement Division Manager should develop 2 a training program and plan for the employees of the Division based upon a training needs assessment. w d 0 0 Recommendation #43: The Code Enforcement Division Manager should develop u a procedure regarding professional development and training of the staff of the E_ Division. v R c w Recommendation #44: The City Planner and the Office of the City Attorney 0° should provide ongoing training to the Code Enforcement Division Manager, w Code Compliance Supervisors, Senior Code Compliance Officers, and Code m Compliance Officers regarding how the ordinances enforced by the Code Enforcement Division, how to interpret these ordinances, how to present cases c for hearing officers, how to prepare requests for warrants, etc. E L U N Q Matrix Consulting Group Page 134 Packet Pg.795 CITY OF SAN BERNARDINO, CALIFORNIA Management Study of the Code Enforcement Division m 0 0 Recommendation #45: The Community Development Director and the Code r Enforcement Division Manager should develop managerial and supervisory training plans for the manager and supervisors of the Code Enforcement 0 Division. The training plans should be focused on managerial and supervisory training and skill development. N v 2. THE CODE COMPLIANCE CLASSIFICATION SERIES SHOULD BE E v MODIFIED TO REQUIRE CACEO CERTIFICATION. M Code Compliance Officers are not required to possess a California Association 0 N of Code Enforcement Officers (CACEO) Basic certificate required within twelve (12) months of employment. c0_ N The requirement for Code Compliance Officers, Supervisors, and Managers to N possess certification is common. The City of Colton, for example, requires its Code N Enforcement Officers to possess the California Association of Code Enforcement 3 Officers (CACEO) Basic Course Certification Program within 24 months of hire / d E appointment. rn R c The job description for the Code Compliance Officer II should be modified to 2 c 0 require the incumbent to possess the California Association of Code Enforcement 'o Officers (CACEO) Basic Course Certification Program within 24 months of hire / E appointment. The job description for Senior Code Compliance Officer, Code 0 w c Compliance Supervisor, and Code Enforcement Division Manager should be revised to v 0 O possess the California Association of Code Enforcement Officers (CACEO) Advanced U 0 c Course Certification Program within 24 months of hire / appointment. M v The requirement for professional certification will upgrade the training and m c U) U) qualifications of the employees of the Division and their ability to provide responsive m m and skilled services to the residents and businesses of San Bernardino. c d E r O R Q Matrix Consulting Group Page 135 Packet Pg.796 CITY OF SAN BERNARDINO, CALIFORNIA Management Study of the Code Enforcement Division v The Code Enforcement Division should budget funds for the costs of the testing 0 v required for its employees to take the California Association of Code Enforcement w 0 T Officers (CACEO) Course Certification examinations and the costs of ongoing training N required to maintain such certification. The initial cost should not be significantly more a E v than already budgeted for education and training, meetings and conferences. A A The acquisition and maintenance of California Association of Code Enforcement 0 Officers (CACEO) Course Certification by employees should be integrated into the annual training plans developed by the manager and supervisors of the Division. `o .2 Recommendation #46: The job description for the Code Compliance Officer II should be modified to require the incumbent to possess the California N Association of Code Enforcement Officers Basic Course Certification Program within 24 months of hire / appointment. N T 9 Recommendation #47: The job description for Senior Code Compliance Officer, Code Compliance Supervisor, and Code Enforcement Division Manager should c be revised to possess the California Association of Code Enforcement Officers E Advanced Course Certification Program within 24 months of hire / appointment. rn m c Recommendation #48: The Code Enforcement Division should budget funds for 2 the costs of the testing required for its employees to take the California $ Association of Code Enforcement Officers Course Certification examinations A and the costs of ongoing training required to maintain such certification. o c Recommendation #49: The acquisition and maintenance of California E Association of Code Enforcement Officers Course Certification by employees should be integrated into the annual training plans developed by the manager c and supervisors of the Division. w m 0 0 U 0 c 'v `m c d m c M w m m c v E s 0 m Q Matrix Consulting Group Page 136 PacketPg797:. CITY OF SAN BERNARDINO, CALIFORNIA Management Study of the Code Enforcement Division m 10. ANALYSIS OF CUSTOMER SERVICE d L In every city in the United States, local governments are being challenged to c 0 V deliver an expanding set of services to a growing number of constituents whose y c expectations are increasing - with a budget that often is not. Addressing these E E rn expectations requires the achievement of savings obtained through enhanced efficiencies - but that, in turn, requires more effective constituent service delivery. The o N public sector no longer has a choice: it must improve its approach to serving c constituents. 0 .y d This chapter presents an analysis of the adequacy of constituent and customer N service practices by the Code Enforcement Division. N 1. THE CODE ENFORCEMENT DIVISION SHOULD TAKE A NUMBER OF STEPS TO IMPROVE ITS SERVICE DELIVERY FOR ITS CUSTOMERS. n c v The American Customer satisfaction Index (ACSI) was established in 1994 by E m the University of Michigan School of Business to provide an economic indicator c tracking the quality of products and services from the perspective of the customer. The 2 N ACSI is the only measure of the quality of economic output nationwide. Research is ° E showing the ACSI to be a leading economic indicator, and a predictor of financial `0 performance at the firm level. ACSI reports scores on a 0 to 100 scale at the national w 0 9 level, and produces indexes for 10 economic sectors, 45 industries (including e- 0 0 c commerce and e-business), more than 225 companies, and over 200 federal or local o A government services. ACSI surveys customers of companies and users of government m services randomly via telephone and e-mail.34 �+ m In its most recent ACSI, local government in the United States did not score well. c w E 3°The American Customer Satisfaction Index, The American Customer Satisfaction Index web site. m a Matrix Consulting Group Page 137 Packet Pg.79$, S.A.a CITY OF SAN BERNARDINO,CALIFORNIA Management Study of the Code Enforcement Division Overall, the ACSI score was 68.3 out of 100. Local government scored higher than four u ) industries and lower than forty-two others. `o T Clearly, local governments have a challenge in meeting and satisfying their customers. The Code Enforcement Division is no exception. The Matrix Consulting N E m Group recommends that the Division take a number of steps to improve customer A service as enumerated below. 0 (1) The Code Enforcement Division Should Develop Guiding Principles and Customer Service Metrics for the Services that It Provides. 0 0 The Division should develop and publish guiding principles and standards that "- d rr outline the nature and quality of service that customers can expect from the Division, N C6 and display it prominently on the Division's web site. A possible guiding principle for the ry T Division is presented below. u, We are a dedicated and committed to enhancing the quality of life in San v Bernardino by providing premium code enforcement services in response m to the needs of everyone who lives and works in our city. Our customers have the right to respect, safety, appropriate assistance, honesty, and competency by the staff of our Division. o 2 In addition, the Division should develop and adopt customer service standards c c that are based upon that guiding principle. Examples of possible standards are E d u presented below. 0 w • If you telephone us, you will speak to a knowledgeable person who will answer g your question, or refer it properly. You will receive no more than two referrals for each call. A • We will answer phone calls promptly and courteously, within four rings, and d return all e-mail and voice mail messages within one workday after receipt. m C • If you have a personal appointment with a departmental employee, you will be m helped within 5 minutes. d a Matrix Consulting Group Page 138 ':PacketPg.799 CITY OF SAN BERNARDINO, CALIFORNIA Management Study of the Code Enforcement Division 0 • You will not have to wait at the Community Development Department counter for a meeting with a Code Enforcement Division employee more than 15 minutes if you do not have an appointment. `o • If you telephone us with a complaint, we will advise you on the telephone or refer your complaint to the proper source. N d • We will acknowledge and respond to your written, e-mail, or telephonic inquiry E regarding a code violation within 2 working days. If we need more time to research and answer, we will contact you within those 2 working days to tell you M when to expect our response and who the contact person is. 0 N • We will make our first site visit to the property that is the subject of the code violation complaint within 5 working days from receipt of your written, e-mail, or telephonic inquiry regarding the code violation, and determine whether a code o violation exists. y d • If a violation does not exist or the violation is unfounded, we will respond within N 10 working days from receipt of your written, e-mail, or telephonic inquiry ;, regarding the code violation and inform you why the code violation does not exist or is unfounded. • If a violation exists, we will respond within 10 working days from receipt of your written, e-mail, or telephonic inquiry regarding the code violation and inform you what we will do to bring the property into compliance with City codes and the m timeline for achieving that compliance. • If a violation exists, we will achieve voluntary compliance (for those cases in o which voluntary compliance can be achieved) within 20 working days from .T receipt of your written, e-mail, or telephonic inquiry regarding the code violation o for property maintenance violations and 40 working days for building code and sub-standard housing violations. E m U • If a violation exists, we will achieve forced compliance (for those cases in which 0 forced compliance is required through administrative or judicial action) within 60 w working days from receipt of your written, e-mail, or telephonic inquiry regarding o the code violation for property maintenance violations and 80 working days for u 0 building code and sub-standard housing violations. v It is important that the Division be very clear about specifying the behavior that m employees are expected to deliver, both with external and internal customers. This N co clarity should be achieved by adopting a written customer service guiding principle and c L Q Matrix Consulting Group Page 139 PacketPg.S00" CITY OF SAN BERNARDINO, CALIFORNIA Management Study of the Code Enforcement Division m written customer service standards. These should, of course, be provided to the v employees of the Division and published to the Division's web site. `0 a It is also important the manager and supervisors of the Code Enforcement U) Division make sure that all of the Division's employees know of the results and receive 0 E m recognition for the things that are going well during performance evaluations and the R c m periodic Division meetings with all Division employees. Behavioral research has shown 0 in that you get more of the behavior you reward. So the manager and these supervisors r� should not make the mistake of mentioning only the area of poor performance, but also `o .2 mention and reward those Division employees who are doing well, and involve all N employees in brainstorming ways to improve the things that are unsatisfactory. o6 N Ultimately, however, the manager and supervisors in the Division should discipline any employees who do not show the behavior necessary to meet the v, d E customer service guiding principle and customer service standards. c Recommendation #50: The manager and supervisors of the Code Enforcement 2 Division should develop customer service metrics for each of its programs (i.e., `o property maintenance, single-family rental inspections, etc.). 'o Recommendation #51: The Code Enforcement Division should publish these customer service metrics to its web site. E d v Recommendation #52: The manager and supervisors of the Code Enforcement Division should make sure that all of the Division's employees knows the results w of how well (or not) the Division is meeting customer service standards and give o recognition for the things that are going well during performance evaluations u 0 and the periodic Division meetings with all Division employees. D A Recommendation #53: The manager and supervisors of the Code Enforcement Division should be held accountable for making sure that the employees of the m Division consistently meet the customer service standards adopted by the w Division. I c m E r 0 m a Matrix Consulting Group Page 140 Packet Pg 80i'". 8.A.aa.. CITY OF SAN BERNARDINO, CALIFORNIA Management Study of the Code Enforcement Division v (2) The Code Enforcement Division Should Formally Notify the Complainant of the Name of the Code Compliance Officer Assigned to Investigate Their Complaint In Writing or By E-Mail. 0 0 T The Code Enforcement Division Division should utilize a Code Compliance y Officer as a single point of contact for the complainant. The complainant should be E d informed of the name of their Code Compliance Officer in a letter upon assignment of A c A the case to a Code Compliance Officer. 0 The complainant should be informed in writing or by e-mail regarding the name of the Code Compliance Officer assigned to their case within five (5) working days of `o An assignment of the case to the Code Compliance Officer. This should include the name, N e-mail address, and phone number of the Code Compliance Officer. ;, N Recommendation #54: The Code Enforcement Division should notify the complainant of the name of the Code Compliance Officer assigned their case no w later than five working days after the submittal of their application including their name, e-mail address, and phone number. v rn (3) The Code Enforcement Division Should Identify Who the Customer Can c Contact If Things Go Wrong in the Delivery of Service By the Division. 2 c 0 The Division should publish to its web site a web page that asks "How Are We 0 Doing." The web page should ask the customer "what are we doing that you like? What E improvements to our services should we be making? You can share your comments 0 w c with us in a number of ways." The customer should be able to leave e-mail comments w d 0 0 with the Community Development Director. u 0 c The Department should, however, provide a greater array of alternatives that a q c d customer can exercise should something go wrong in the delivery of service by the m c M N Division. Possible alternatives could include: m m C d E L U A Q Matrix Consulting Group Page 141 Paoket,Pg:802 : CITY OF SAN BERNARDINO, CALIFORNIA Management Study of the Code Enforcement Division 0 • Speak or write to the Code Enforcement Division Manager, providing the e-mail 0 address and name of the Code Enforcement Division Manager on-line at the v web page that asks "How Are We Doing"; `o T • Setting up an appointment with the Community Development Director to discuss the situation in more detail. in d The customer should be given greater options to voice concerns or complaints E m R regarding the level of service delivered by the Division. Recommendation #55: The Code Enforcement Division should revise its web N page to include "How Are We Doing" — and provide options to the customer regarding who to contact if things go wrong in the delivery of service by the Division. ` 0 N (4) The Feedback from the Customer Should Be Made a Basic Part of the Manager and the Supervisor's Work Experience. N m Information regarding customer satisfaction must be available and understood N T 'O by the Code Enforcement Division Manager, Code Compliance Supervisors, the Senior m c Code Compliance Officers and all the employees of the Division. E E rn The Division should expand its web page to include "How Are We Doing". On that web page, customers should have the opportunity to complete a survey that asks o .T such questions as "were you able to resolve the code violation complaint on a timely o c basis', "was our service timely and efficient", etc.? This information should be E v u summarized not less than once a year on that web page so that customers can monitor w U how well other customers perceive the quality and responsiveness of the services 0 provided by the Division. a In addition, the Code Enforcement Division Manager and Code Compliance m supervisors should make random telephone contacts with customers not less than N twice a month. The purpose of these contacts should be to elicit feedback from these c customers regarding the quality and timeliness of the service provided by the Division. E r U A Q Matrix Consulting Group Page 142 Packet Pg.803 CITY OF SAN BERNARDINO, CALIFORNIA Management Study of the Code Enforcement Division d The results of these contacts should be summarized in a simple e-mail to the 0 Community Development Director to provide constant feedback. For example, the `0 T Code Enforcement Division Manager and Code Compliance supervisors could ask N such questions as the overall perspective of the customer regarding the service w E 0 provided by the Division, whether the Division's staff keep the customer informed M c A regarding the process and timelines of their complaint, whether Division staff provided 0 N N the applicant complete and consistent answers regarding whether the violation was unfounded, whether Division staff responded to the customer in a timely manner, etc. `o .y Recommendation #56: The customer satisfaction results collected from the Code Enforcement Division's web page regarding the "How Are We Doing" survey a should be summarized not less than once a year on that web page so that ;, customers can monitor how well other customers perceive the quality and N responsiveness of the services provided by the Division. a Recommendation #57: The managers and supervisors of the Code Enforcement U' c Division should make random telephone contacts with customers not less than E twice a month. The purpose of these contacts should be to elicit feedback from these customers regarding the quality and timeliness of the service provided by c the Division. The results of these contacts should be summarized in a simple e- mail to the Community Development Director to provide constant feedback. `o Mn (5) The Code Enforcement Division Should Proactively Seek Feedback From o Customers Using Survey Monkey Not Less Than Once A Year. c d E The Code Enforcement Division should not merely rely on individual case-by- 0 w c case customer complaints using "How Are We Doing" on the Division's web page to W d 0 0 provide feedback to the Division. Most dissatisfied customers never complain directly, L) 0 c instead they simply give up or tell others [city executives and city council members] c about their bad experiences.35 Encouraging customer feedback can help the Division m c m y understand their customers' expectations and address problems quickly. Co m a E 35 Janelle Barlow and Claus Moller, A Complaint Is A Gift, 1996. Q Matrix Consulting Group Page 143 PacketPg.804 .- S.A.a CITY OF SAN BERNARDINO, CALIFORNIA Management Study of the Code Enforcement Division 0 Rather than use a complaint system that waits for the customer to complain, the U Division should proactively solicit feedback from customers by sending a link to an on- o T line survey using Survey Monkey. This should be done not less than once annually. U) Surveying customers should be a routine, ongoing activity. The results from each 5 E U survey represent a snapshot of how customers perceive the Division's performance at A _ a given moment in time. The true power of survey results lies in the trends that 0 develop over time. These surveys should encompass aspects of customer service that include reliability, responsiveness, courtesy, communications, competence, o N understanding the customer, etc. N The American Statistical Association published a brochure series titled "What is N a survey" that can assist the Division in the development of the survey a Ehttp.,//www.amstat.org/sections/srms/whatsurvey.html]. Survey Monkey w c v [http.//www.survey_monkey.com/% E5D] is one of several tools available for conducting A more surveys on the Internet. _ _ 0 Recommendation #58: The Code Enforcement Division should be proactive in .y seeking feedback from customers by sending a link to an on-line survey using o Survey Monkey. This should be done not less than once annually. v E Recommendation #59: The Code Enforcement Division should publish the 2 results of the proactive customer satisfaction survey to their web site. w _ w (6) The Code Enforcement Division Should Analyze the Results of the c Proactive Customer Survey Once a Year and Identify Measures that the u 0 Department Should Take To Improve Customer Service. 'v Information is critical to addressing the underlying cause of a customer m complaint. In order to prevent future customers from suffering from the same issue, N the Code Enforcement Division must analyze the results of customer complaints and c the results of the proactive customer satisfaction survey conducted by the Division. The E L U A Q Matrix Consulting Group Page 144 Packet Pg.805 CITY OF SAN BERNARDINO, CALIFORNIA Management Study of the Code Enforcement Division v Code Enforcement Division should analyze the data and develop solutions that o v address the causes of complaints. The compiled results of the survey can also help the 0 Code Enforcement Division prioritize their customer service improvement efforts and v in communicate ongoing service problems throughout the Division. Lastly, complaint data E v can be used to identify training needs, thereby improving employee skills. A A Recommendation #60: The Code Enforcement Division should analyze the results of the proactive customer survey once a year and identify measures that the Division is taking to improve customer service. (7) The Code Enforcement Division Should Develop and Adopt a Customer o Service Procedure. N d z The procedure should set standards for how staff of the Division interacts with w customers. The procedure should set a policy that the Division will provide excellent T customer service to its customers. The procedure should establish service guidelines y and procedures i.e., all Internet inquiries and phone messages received by the Division E rn will be responded to within one workday of receipt of the message. R Recommendation #61: The manager and supervisors of the Code Enforcement c Division should develop and adopt a customer service procedure. 0 (8) The Code Enforcement Division Should Provide an Orientation to All c Employees for the Division Regarding the Customer Service Procedure E and Metrics of the Division. u `0 Once the Division develops the customer service procedure, the manager and w` v 0 0 supervisors of the Code Enforcement Division should brief the employees of the U 0 c Division and provide an orientation to all of its employees regarding that procedure, the M c expectations of the employees, and how the employees will be held accountable for m c m W their performance vis-a-vis the procedure and metrics. m c v E z m a Matrix Consulting Group Page 145 PacketPg:80&; CITY OF SAN BERNARDINO, CALIFORNIA Management Study of the Code Enforcement Division d Recommendation #62: The manager and supervisors of the Code Enforcement 0 Division should provide an orientation to all employees for the Department regarding the customer service policy and metrics of the Department. `o T 2. THE CODE ENFORCEMENT DIVISION SHOULD ENHANCE ITS RELATIONS WITH THE NEIGHBORHOODS AND BUSINESSES OF THE CITY. N c m The Code Enforcement Division is already proactive in engaging with v m @ neighborhood associations. The Code Compliance Supervisors and the Senior Code Compliance Officers frequently attend neighborhood association meetings. The Division, however, should enhance the extent of its formal public relations and public c 0 information distribution to the neighborhoods and businesses of the City. The steps v z recommended by the Matrix Consulting Group to accomplish this are presented below. N (1) The Code Enforcement Division Should Develop a Formal Written N Communications Plan. v Before the Code Enforcement Division contacts neighborhoods, businesses, E and the media, it should first develop a simple, straight forward communication plan rn d @ c approximately two pages in length that takes into account the Division's goals, a c 0 messaging, audiences, tactics, existing resources, timing, evaluation, and budget. The 0 purpose of the communication plan is to assist the Division in developing a strong, d E effective and consistent communication strategy that integrates print, broadcast, and 0 `c interactive media —that serves to drive communication efforts by the Division. W d 0 0 The plan should contain strategies to enhance outreach, increase exposure, 0 c enhance the awareness by the public of the services provided by the Code A c d Enforcement Division, and provide direction to outreach efforts. The plan should m c @ N develop recommendations based upon an assessment of existing communication m methods with a goal of better integrating, expanding, and targeting communications c d E L U Q Matrix Consulting Group Page 146 Packet Pg.$97 CITY OF SAN BERNARDINO, CALIFORNIA Management Study of the Code Enforcement Division m within the scope of the Division's existing resources. The plan should: 0 0 Identify the key audiences the Division wishes to reach (i.e., San Bernardino residents, City, Community Development Department, and Division employees, 0 T San Bernardino City Council, news media, homeowner associations, Chamber of Commerce, etc.); in m • The key messages that the Division wishes to convey to those audiences i.e., E preserving neighborhoods, what constitute code violations, how to obtain low interest loans and grants to resolve violations and improve homes and businesses, etc., with these key messages serving as basic building blocks for speeches, news releases, and publications; • How communication will be coordinated within the Division; c 0 The communication tools and channels that will be utilized by the Division such as utility bill inserts, cable television municipal channel, editorial board briefings, etc., the frequency that these tools will be utilized, and the key target N audience(s) for each tool; N The "identity' that the Division wishes to convey to those audiences i.e., "who r we are'; a c • The strategic communication recommendations; and E E v m • An internal calendar for Division communication events, news releases, and "c publications. c 0 The consulting team estimates that the development of this communications plan y 0 should require approximately forty (40) staff hours to develop this communication plan. c d E Recommendation #63: The Code Enforcement Division should develop a formal written communications plan. w c w Recommendation #64: The Code Enforcement Division should update the o communications plan not less than once every three years. Q 0 c (2) The Code Enforcement Division Should Develop a Proactive Team To Communicate the Key Messages Of The Division. v m The Division should form a team of its manager, supervisors, and Code y Compliance _Officers to make presentations to civic organizations, service clubs, c m E L U A Q Matrix Consulting Group Page 147 PacketPg..808( CITY OF SAN BERNARDINO, CALIFORNIA Management Study of the Code Enforcement Division m neighborhood associations, chamber of commerce, etc., that convey the key messages 0 v of the Division. This should occur not less than once every other month. w 0 T The consulting team estimates that the communication of key messages to civic N organizations, service clubs, neighborhood associations, etc. should require 1E 0 E w approximately one (1) staff hour for each event. Recommendation #65: The Code Enforcement Division should develop a proactive team that includes the Division's manager, supervisors, and Code N Compliance Officers to communicate the key messages of the Division, and make presentations to civic organizations, service clubs, neighborhood associations, chamber of commerce, etc., that convey the key messages of the o Division not less than once every month. d m (3) The Code Enforcement Division Should Enhance Its Web Page. w o The Code Enforcement Division has published comprehensive information to its N T a web page. However, the web page lacks information regarding the names, City phone n numbers, and e-mail addresses of the Code Enforcement Division Manager, Code E E m Compliance Supervisors, Senior Code Compliance Officers, Code Compliance "c Officers; the specific codes enforced by the Division (rather than links to the Municipal `o A Code); descriptions of the how the Division responds to complaints (i.e., Notice of o c Violation); property maintenance standards, etc. E d U The Division should enhance its web page to include additional information 0 w m including such information as the following: c U • Contact information for the Code Enforcement Division Manager, Code G Compliance Supervisors, Senior Code Compliance Officers, Code Compliance Officers including names, landline and City cell phone numbers, and e-mail addresses; m c m • A customer satisfaction survey ("How Are We Doing"); y m Links to the Community Development Director to express concerns, if any, c regarding the level of service delivered by the Division; E L V A Q Matrix Consulting Group Page 148 Packet Pg.804 S.A.a CITY OF SAN BERNARDINO, CALIFORNIA Management Study of the Code Enforcement Division m 0 0 Electronic brochures regarding understanding City codes, property maintenance 0 standards, single-family rental and multi-family rental maintenance standards, w with all of this information being bi-lingual; 0 v • The top ten most frequent violations found by the Division; w 0 • The capacity to report code enforcement violations on-line including the ability of v the complainant to check the status of the complaint on-line; R R • The most recent monthly performance report prepared by the Division; 0 N N • The geographic assignments of the Code Compliance Officers portrayed on a map of the City; and 0 • Volunteer opportunities with an electronic brochure regarding the volunteer program. N Some of these features are already available, but most are not. The web page for the ;, N Division can provide powerful informational tools for the Division to help members of the community understand the services delivered by the Division and the ordinance v E that it enforces. rn m c Recommendation #66: The Code Enforcement Division Manager should enhance 2 the web page of the Division. `c N (4) The Code Enforcement Division Should Publish an Electronic Article in the o Community Development Department Newsletter Once Every Two Months. E This article should be designed to communicate the services provided by the 2 0 w c Division, important events, how to respond to Notices of Violation, how to submit a W d 0 0 complaint regarding a possible violation, property maintenance standards, etc. u 0 c Other code enforcement divisions publish such articles. For example, the City of d Seattle publishes client assistance memos. The client assistance memo for code m c m N compliance in October 2008 addressed the City's laws on property owner and tenant m rights and responsibilities. c d E L U A Q Matrix Consulting Group Page 149 Pabket,P.g.tttD CITY OF SAN BERNARDINO, CALIFORNIA Management Study of the Code Enforcement Division m Residents and businesses should be able to subscribe, electronically, to the 0 d Community Development Department newsletter and receive the newsletter w 0 electronically. The newsletter should also be distributed to employees. 3 rn The consulting team estimates that the publishing of this newsletter should d E m require approximately eight (8) staff hours for each newsletter. R Recommendation #67: The Code Enforcement Division should publish an article in the Community Development Department newsletter once every three months. Recommendation #68: The Community Development Department should enable residents and businesses to subscribe, electronically, to the newsletter and o receive the newsletter electronically. "- d (5) The Code Enforcement Division Should Use "Social Media" To w Communicate With The Residents And Businesses Of San Bernardino. ;, N "Social media" refers to the various applications for discussion and information 9 2 sharing, including social networking sites, blogs, video-sharing sites, podcasts, wikis, y c v E message boards, and online forums. Examples include Facebook, Twitter and rn c YouTube. Social networking is the practice of expanding the number of an individual or 2 C 0 organization's contacts by making connections through these web-based social media 'o applications. The use of social media will be an important tool in moving towards a E more informed and engaged community. The use of social media will not take the 0 `c place of pre-existing communication efforts. It is simply one more tool for the Division W m 0 0 to utilize in its communications with our citizens. U 0 c The consulting team estimates that the use of "social media' should require c `v approximately two (2) staff hours on a weekly basis to support. m Recommendation #69: The Code Enforcement Division should use "social media" to communicate with the residents and businesses of San Bernardino. c m E L U A Z Q Matrix Consulting Group Page 150 Packet Pgj 81 T CITY OF SAN BERNARDINO, CALIFORNIA Management Study of the Code Enforcement Division v (6) The Code Enforcement Division Should Enhance Public Education 0 Regarding Compliance with Codes Enforced by the Division. L w The Code Enforcement Division should develop additional educational materials D regarding its services and the codes that it enforces to educate the community about w d code issues. This should include information materials regarding the role of Code E m Enforcement, the Code Enforcement process, and details about services available to property owners, such as how to enter a complaint, how to remain confidential if you wish to do so, how to reach your Code Compliance Officer with questions, and how to G O avoid violations on your property. "- d z The Division should publish this material to its web site, but also utilize water w C6 utility bill stuffers, distribute the materials to the Chamber of Commerce, recreation N T a centers, businesses such as sign companies (such as a brochure about sign w regulations and common violations), etc. The Division should use multiple outlets to £ d o, deliver its message, not just neighborhood associations. In addition, in its Notice of Violation letters to property owners, the Division `o A should include educational materials on the code enforcement process. o c Recommendation #70: The Code Enforcement Division should develop an v enhanced set of educational materials about the code enforcement process, common code violations, and the kinds of activities that require a permit. The 0 description of code enforcement processes should include an overview of the W m avenues available to property owners to resolve violations, including the Notice g of Violation process, voluntary compliance, and administrative citations and O administrative civil penalties; and the materials should provide an overview of 5 the appeal and penalty processes. These materials should include definitions A and descriptions stated clearly in lay terms. d m Recommendation #71: The Code Enforcement Division should investigate and n pursue additional distribution venues for these materials to support its stated goal of educating the community. m c Recommendation #72: The Code Enforcement Division, in its Notice of Violation E L U A Q Matrix Consulting Group Page 151 PacketPg'672' CITY OF SAN BERNARDINO, CALIFORNIA Management Study of the Code Enforcement Division m letters to property owners, should include educational materials on the code 0 enforcement process. s 3. THE CODE ENFORCEMENT DIVISION SHOULD ENHANCE ITS COMMUNICATION WITH COMPLAINANTS REGARDING THE STATUS OF THEIR COMPLAINTS. rn d The customers interviewed by the Matrix Consulting Group did not believe that v m A the Division was effective in communicating the status of cases with the complainant. This problem also includes the manner in which the Division has setup the on-line complaint system in the City's CRM (customer relationship management system). The c 0 Division asks the complainant to rate their satisfaction with the services provided by the d Division in the CRM after the Division has made the first contact with the owner or N o tenant of the property that is the subject of the complaint, but before the complaint or N T v code violation is resolved. ' rn c The Division should revise the point at which it asks the complainant to rate their a w satisfaction with the services provided by the Division. The Division should request that A evaluation of its services by the complainant in the CRM after the case has been `o A closed. o c d Recommendation #73: The Division should revise the point at which it asks the E complainant to rate their satisfaction with the services provided by the Division. The Division should request that evaluation of its services in the CRM by the 2 complainant after the case has been closed. u, m 0 0 U 0 c 'v A c `m m c m ur m m c m E r u A Q Matrix Consulting Group Page 152 Packet Pg. 613 CITY OF SAN BERNARDINO, CALIFORNIA Management Study of the Code Enforcement Division m 11 . ANALYSIS OF INFORMATION TECHNOLOGY s This chapter presents an analysis of information technology as it pertains to the c 0 D Code Enforcement Division. Effective code enforcement divisions use technology such n c as automated information systems, geographic information systems (GIS), and the E v rn interconnection of these systems online to improve communication, reduce paperwork and build easily accessible project records. The paragraphs below present an analysis of information technology practices c in the Code Enforcement Division. The Division does not meet best practices as it 2 n 0 pertains to the use and deployment of an automated information system, a GIS system, s N or document imaging systems. N T 1. THE PUBLIC AND COMPLAINANTS SHOULD BE PROVIDED WITH ACCESS TO THE DIVISION'S AUTOMATED INFORMATION SYSTEM OVER w THE INTERNET. v E v Automating the complaint process, by enabling residents and businesses to c m submit complaints regarding possible code violations over the Internet, opens the door 0 N for customer self-service. Simple on-line capabilities using GOEnforce should allow c residents and businesses to use both the Internet and GOEnforce to check the status E u of their complaint regarding possible code violations. w c w Modern, progressive automated information systems provide the capacity for the 0 U public to access the system through the Internet. This capacity would make information 0 T from the City's code enforcement database accessible via the Internet by residents, c v m businesses, and other interested parties. In this instance, the City's web site would rn provide a search form where citizens enter a property address to receive current information on that complaint regarding a possible code violation, 24 hours a day, E E U A a Matrix Consulting Group Page 153 Packet Pg..814" CITY OF SAN BERNARDINO, CALIFORNIA Management Study of the Code Enforcement Division a seven days a week, from any computer with Internet access. 0 0 Giving residents, businesses, and other interested parties the ability to check w 0 T the status online reduces telephone and walk-in traffic for the Code Enforcement N Division, and allows residents, businesses, and other interested parties to review this 0 E m information even when City Hall is closed. A It should also be utilized to enable residents, businesses, and other interested 0 parties to review possible code violations online. By placing information about possible code violations on the web, citizens have increased opportunity to participate in the o .y preservation of their neighborhood. N Recommendation #74: The City should utilize the automated information system ;, (GOEnforce) to provide the capacity for residents, businesses, and other interested parties regarding possible code violations through the Internet. v 2. ALL OF THE DIVISIONS IN THE COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT SHOULD UTILIZE THE SAME INFORMATION SYSTEM TO MEET ALL OF THEIR E REQUIREMENTS FOR ISSUANCE OF PERMITS AND THE RESOLUTION OF rn VIOLATIONS OF CITY CODES. c m The City will be making a significant investment in the New World enterprise $ .T resource planning system (or information system). The system will be capable of a 'o c m broad range of tasks necessary for the Community Development Department including E J the following: W w Plan review tracking; o U O Permitting including the issuance and tracking of permits; s a Inspections scheduling and tracking; d m c Workflow management; w • Fee calculation and collection; m c Customer communications through web-based customer services; E r U A Q Matrix Consulting Group Page 154 Packet Pg:8f 6 '; S.A.a CITY OF SAN BERNARDINO, CALIFORNIA Management Study of the Code Enforcement Division m 0 0 • Telephone-based voice response services; and r • Inter- and intra-departmental communication and management. v All of the divisions in the Community Development Department, including the n c v Code Enforcement Division, should utilize the New World enterprise resource planning E rn m system (or information system) for all aspects of the land entitlement and building permit process and resolution of violations of City codes. N Recommendation #75: All of the divisions in the Community Development v Department should utilize the New World enterprise resource planning system o for all aspects of the land entitlement and building permit process and resolution of violations of City codes. This includes the Code Enforcement Division. N Recommendation #76: Modules, applications and reports should be developed within the New World enterprise resource planning system to support the work N of the divisions within the Community Development Department. 0 Recommendation #77: Training hould be provided to staff of the Community m 9 P Y Development Department as appropriate in the use of the New World enterprise E resource planning system. c 3. THE CODE ENFORCEMENT DIVISION SHOULD IMPLEMENT GIS AS A 2 MEANS FOR IMPROVING ITS BUSINESS PROCESSES, SERVICES, o INFORMATION AND DECISION-MAKING. 2 'c As the acquisition, management, and dissemination of information continue to d E become increasingly valuable functions within local governments, so too has GIS 2 0 w c proven to be increasingly valuable. The City of San Bernardino is not exception, and w d 0 0 GIS and GIS-based technologies have contributed to improve the business processes, O 0 c infrastructure, services, information, and decision-making by the City. v The Code Enforcement Division works closely with other divisions in the m c m w Community Development Department. The Division will, however, be migrating to New m c v E u U A Q Matrix Consulting Group Page 155 Packat Pg. 616 ` 8.A.a CITY OF SAN BERNARDINO, CALIFORNIA Management Study of the Code Enforcement Division m World, an enterprise resource planning information system recently purchased by the 0 City as will the other divisions within the Community Development Department. `o T As the Division migrates to the New World system, the Division should expand N the use and application of GIS. The particular needs of the Division are summarized v E v below. R A • Mapping and Spatial Analysis of Code Enforcement Division Data. A key objective for Code Enforcement Division staff should be the mapping and analysis of code violations - this objective can be accomplished by linking case information with a City address point layer(or to a parcel layer). c 0 The Division can utilize GIS to assist in several tasks, including: m z — Code violation location analysis; N C6 — Using maps to identify neighborhoods that particular and proactive N enforcement should be focused; and a 0 — Statistical analysis for budgetary preparations y � m It is recommended that Code Enforcement Division staff utilize an Intranet GIS d m data browser to conduct basic spatial analysis and produce maps. This Intranet browser should be based on the enterprise-wide Intranet GIS data browser (this is an ArcIMS implementation). For more advanced analysis and other tasks `o such as data creation, the Division staff should work with the Information Technology Division, which can use advanced GIS software such as ArcView or o Arclnfo to conduct many of these tasks. d E • Public Access to Geo•Spatial Coe Enforcement Division Data. Code violation database search with a GIS interface would provide the public with the ability to search for violations through input fields or via a mapping interface. m v Subject to creation (geocoding) of code violation layers based on the New World g database, the Division should work with the Information Technology Division to U create an application with similar search functionality that will allow users to click C on a parcel (or address point) and view code violation information. q d • Mapping and Spatial Analysis of Land Use and Zoning Data. A key need is m increased and improved use of GIS to map and analyze land use and zoning y data as part of the investigation of possible violations of City codes. m The Division could utilize GIS to assist in several tasks, including: d C a Matrix Consulting Group Page 156 Packet Pg. 817 CITY OF SAN BERNARDINO, CALIFORNIA Management Study of the Code Enforcement Division m — Land use and land development mapping and analysis 0 d — Zoning data mapping and analysis `o T — Environmental inventories mapping and analysis N — Code enforcement mapping and analysis w E v — Production of public meeting and exhibition maps A ° — Statistical analysis for budgetary preparations 0 in in — Spatial and quantitative analysis of demographics and housing. Overall, the Division has three (3) primary GIS needs: `o y .j • Mapping and spatial analysis; N Public Access to geo-spatial planning data; and ;, N Formal GIS training for Division staff. However, this will be a Ion journey for the Division to meet these three 3 GIS primary 91 Y ( ) P rY ° E needs given its current utilization of GIS, which is negligible. rn m c Recommendation #78: The Code Enforcement Division Manager should work with the Information Technology Division to address the GIS needs in the Code o Enforcement Division in concert with the deployment of the New World enterprise resource planning information system. o 4. THE WEED ABATEMENT PROGRAM SHOULD UTILIZE THE SAME E INFORMATION SYSTEM AS THE OTHER CODE ENFORCEMENT PROGRAMS. ° `c w d The two staff assigned to the weed abatement program within the Code o v Enforcement Division do not utilize GOEnforce, the information system utilized by the v° Division. ` v m Instead, the two staff assigned to the weed abatement program utilize a legacy w information system developed by the Information Technology Division. This system c effectively handles the needs of these two staff to input parcels and print Notices of E L u m a Matrix Consulting Group Page 157 Packet Pg.'878. CITY OF SAN BERNARDINO, CALIFORNIA Management Study of the Code Enforcement Division v Violation, integrate owner and legal description information from assessors parcel d maps and databases, bill owners for abatement of weeds by City contractors, etc. w 0 T While the legacy information system meets their needs at the present time, the in Division itself will be migrating to the New World enterprise resource planning system v E m (or information system). The weed abatement program should migrate to this system A as well. The development of modules within the New World enterprise resource 0 N planning system (or information system) for the Code Enforcement Division should _. integrate the needs of the weed abatement program. This should be based upon the a N development of a needs requirement developed by the Code Enforcement Division N Manager and the Information Technology Division. C, N Recommendation #79: The weed abatement program should migrate from the legacy information system developed by the Information Technology Division to ' the New World enterprise resource planning system (or information system). v, c 0 E Recommendation #80: The development of modules within the New World rn enterprise resource planning system (or information system) for the Code Enforcement Division should integrate the needs of the weed abatement 2 program. This should be based upon the development of a needs requirement o developed by the Code Enforcement Division Manager and the Information A Technology Division. o 5. THE CODE ENFORCEMENT DIVISION SHOULD DEVELOP A PLAN OF E IMPLEMENTATION FOR THE DEPLOYMENT OF THE NEW WORLD ENTERPRISE RESOURCE PLANNING SYSTEM BY THE DIVISION. W W The challenge for the Division as it migrates from GOEnforce is to assure the c O effective implementation of the New World enterprise resource planning system (or v c G R information system). The Division should not be passive and merely await the E d m deployment of the system for the Division, it should tale an active role in defining what w will be included in the module(s) developed for the Division to replace GOEnforce. E E r u m Matrix Consulting Group Page 158 Packet Pg.819 B.A.a CITY OF SAN BERNARDINO, CALIFORNIA Management Study of the Code Enforcement Division v The Division should develop an implementation plan for the deployment of the u module(s) of the New World enterprise resource planning system for code enforcement. 0 T The plan should be developed in concert with the Information Technology Division. It U) serves as a reference of the module(s) that will be developed for the Division, what d E d information will be contained in the module(s), what the screens will contain and will A look like, how many databases will be developed, etc. 0 The elements of this implementation plan are presented below. • The Division should convene a planning committee consisting of its staff o and a representative of the Information Technology Division. The planning committee would become responsible for the development of the technology plan for the information system in the Division with the support of the Information N Technology Division. Team members should develop a vision for the system, determine the goals that must be met to reach it, and create steps to implement those goals. Effective technology implementation plans focus on applications, not technology. The planning committee should develop a plan based on what ' staff and residents / businesses should be able to do with New World enterprise resource planning system, as it pertains to code enforcement, and let those E �✓ outcomes determine the evolution and development of modules in the New m World enterprise resource planning system for the Division, M Project scope. The project scope should include the following: o N — The proposed solution; o — A concise, measurable statement of what the project will accomplish, E and, what it will not try to accomplish; 0 `c — How the Division will utilize the system and for what purposes; and u d a 0 — The proposed solution and the business processes that will be used with U system and their characteristics. __ a The project description should identify the needs for each of the programs in the v Division (i.e., single-family rental inspection, multi-family rental inspection, m property maintenance, weed abatement, etc.)that will utilize the system. N • Project Approach. This section of the implementation plan should provide a brief description of the project approach including a high level overview of the v E z U m Q Matrix Consulting Group Page 159 Packet Pg. 820 8.A.a CITY OF SAN BERNARDINO, CALIFORNIA Management Study of the Code Enforcement Division m project approach, project team structure, and project plan. This project approach o should include: U„ z — Project deliverables and quality objectives. A list of deliverables that will 0 be generated on completion of the installation of the system should be developed, i.e., replace GOEnforce, convert the weed abatement N program from its legacy information system to the new system, automate d the preparation of warrants, etc., with key milestones for those E deliverables. Each deliverable should provide a description of its m objectives in terms of output quality and approval requirements. — Responsibilities. The project team should be defined, and roles and N responsibilities assigned to named individuals. •• Project Leader for the deployment of the system for the Division o i.e., Code Enforcement Division Manager; •• Project Manager (Information Technology Division project manager); •• Project Team Member(s) (including Information Services team members and (those staff in the Division that will serve as quality control for the deployment);) a •• Test coordinator from Information Technology Division responsible w for testing the databases developed for the Division; •• Documentation coordinator from the Information Technology `.r Division responsible for documenting the module(s) developed for m the Division; and •• Quality assurance coordinator from the Information Technology Division. o MA The same person may have multiple roles on a project. o d — Plans for implementation support activities. Plans for implementations support activities by Information Technology should be described. Examples of support activities are training of Division staff in the use of 2 the system, module(s) access rights, what data will be treated as i confidential, etc. 0 — Testing schedule and program. Testing activities relate to reviews and quality tests that will be carried out during the project, including responsibilities, approximate schedule and effort required. For example, module and screen design reviews, database testing, system testing, m acceptance testing, etc. should be identified. A list of all Division reviews y before acceptance should be identified and planned for including of acceptance test results and testing for conformance to agreed-upon aD requirements. d E Q Matrix Consulting Group Page 160 Packet Pg. 821 CITY OF SAN BERNARDINO, CALIFORNIA Management Study of the Code Enforcement Division m — Project schedule. The project schedule should consist of a Gantt chart of activities, resources and assigned responsibilities allocated. s • Project Requirements. This section of the plan should identify the project 0 requirements of the Division for the migration from GOEnforce to the New World enterprise resource planning information system. This should progress from the y general to the specific, from a general and overall description of the system, what it is intended to accomplish, and who will utilize the system (i.e., Code E m Enforcement Division, Office of the City Attorney, Fire Department, Police Department, etc.) to the data elements to be included in the module(s). It should include process descriptions and flow charts of the processes used by the Division to conduct its business i.e., single-family rentals, multi-family rentals, N weed abatement, etc. These measures are essential to the successful deployment of the New World $ N enterprise resource planning information system by the Division. The Standish Group, N a research outfit that tracks corporate information technology purchases and ;, N deployment, has found that 66% of all information technology projects either fail v outright or take much longer to install than expected. The development of this N 9 9 P P m E implementation plan is essential to the successful implementation of the system by the R R Division. � c 0 Recommendation #81: The Code Enforcement Division should develop an implementation plan for the deployment of the New World enterprise planning o system by the Division. E 6. THE CODE ENFORCEMENT DIVISION SHOULD DEVELOP A REPLACEMENT PLAN FOR ITS LAPTOPS AND PORTABLE PRINTERS. w v Discussions with the staff of the Code Enforcement Division indicated that much v 0 U of the computer laptops and printers assigned to the Division substantially exceed four G c D N to five years of age. The Code Enforcement Division should develop a replacement v m plan for its laptops and portable printers to ensure that computing technology N equipment is kept current with accepted standards and is reliable. m c d E L u Z Q Matrix Consulting Group Page 161 Packet Pg.827:. CITY OF SAN BERNARDINO, CALIFORNIA Management Study of the Code Enforcement Division m The Division lacks a formal, written replacement plan for its laptops and portable 0 d printers. The result of not having a formal replacement cycle plan is wide variance in 0 the capabilities of computers being used beyond recommended end-of-life cycles, N failing technology, time consuming ordering processes, and a costly cascading process. w E 0 To address these issues, the laptops and portable printers should be placed on a M replacement cycle. 0 The Division, in consultation with the Information Technology Division, should develop a formal written replacement plan for its laptops and portable printers, and o A request budgetary approval for replacement of this equipment based upon the N replacement plan. The Matrix Consulting Group recommends a replacement cycle of ;, N four years. Recommendation #82: The Code Enforcement Division should develop a t replacement plan for its laptops and portable printers in consultation with the £ Information Technology Division, and request budgetary approval for "o replacement of this equipment based upon the replacement plan. "c 0 c 0 y C d E d U O C W d 0 O U 0 C a m F: d CO c m N m m C d E t U N Q Matrix Consulting Group Page 162 Packet Psi.823' CITY OF SAN BERNARDINO, CALIFORNIA Management Study of the Code Enforcement Division m 12. ANALYSIS OF CODE ENFORCEMENT OPERATIONS a This chapter presents an analysis of the operations of the Cade Enforcement N Division. The Division, lust like other City departments, faces a number of challenges m E d including fiscal limitations and enhancing levels of service in the face of these limitations. The effective response of the Division to these challenges requires that the 0 N Division transform the way it does its business by enhancing its productivity, using the Division's information system (GOEnforce) to document the productivity of its staff, o installing accountability systems for the manager, supervisors, and Code Compliance N Officers, and reengineering work processes. N Interviews with representatives of neighborhood associations and other city 3 associations, and driving through the City's neighborhoods made evident that there are d E a host of obvious violations of the property maintenance ordinance, sign regulations, "o A c and other ordinances that are the responsibility of the Division. The Division is not 2 C 0 effectively and consistently enforcing these ordinances. Examples of these violations 'o included: m E Illegal campaign and other advertised event signs on public and private property; 2 W 0 • Grass and weed growth in rights-of-way and vacant lots with untrimmed trees, o shrubs, weeds, grass, and debris; Q 0 c Fences that have become a patchwork such as combination chain link, wood, A and metal bars; ` d m City dumpsters covered with graffiti that are not enclosed in dumpster N enclosures; m • City parking lots and alleys that contain weeds, potholes, graffiti, and illegally d dumped trash that detracts from the City's appearance; E r 0 a Matrix Consulting Group Page 163 Packet Pg.824 =_ s.a.a CITY OF SAN BERNARDINO, CALIFORNIA Management Study of the Code Enforcement Division m v 0 • Homes with roofs that leak, and that have resolved the problem for lengthy periods of time by covering the roof with large blue tarps; 0 T • Foreclosed homes that are boarded up, bit covered with graffiti, and whose yards are filled with tall weeds and unkempt growth; and y d Businesses with their windows entirely covered (or nearly so) with E d advertisements. R c m These violations are obvious to the untrained eye, and should be obvious to the Code 0 Compliance Officers, Senior Code Compliance Officers, Code Compliance Supervisors, _. and Code Enforcement Division Manager. o N The challenge for the Community Development Director and the Code N Enforcement Division Manager is to motivate all of the staff of the Division to be N passionate about the City that they serve (and to discipline those that don't) such that v the staff works tirelessly to improve the appearance of the City. It is clear that many of d E the Division's staff already have that passion. It is also clear that some do not. "o A 1. THE CODE ENFORCEMENT DIVISION SHOULD WORK WITH THE PLANNING DIVISION TO CONDUCT A RISK ASSESSMENT TO ENABLE o ALLOCATION OF RESOURCES BY GEOGRAPHICAL AREA AND DEVELOP NEIGHBORHOOD REVITALIZATION PLANS. o c Not all areas of the City have the same needs from the perspective of code E U enforcement. Of the twenty-nine (29) beats or areas in the City, nine (9) areas w w d accounted for 52% of the total code enforcement cases in 2010. Conversely, nine (9) o U other areas accounted for only 13% of the total code enforcement cases in 2010. By S D A the beginning of November 2011, Beat C1 — in the area approximating Waterman m Avenue at 40`h Street — had the greatest number of code enforcement complaints in N Co 2011 (as of the beginning of November 2011) — 11% of the total complaints received c by the Division. In contrast, Beats D3 and D4 had the fewest with 3.7% of the total E r U A Q Matrix Consulting Group Page 164 Packet Pg: 825::: 8.A.a CITY OF SAN BERNARDINO, CALIFORNIA Management Study of the Code Enforcement Division a complaints received (as of the beginning of November 2011). These beats are south of v Rialto Avenue in proximity to Waterman Avenue. `o T This data suggests that the effectiveness of code enforcement in the City rests, 3 w in part, on identifying those areas of greatest need and focusing much of the resources E m of the Division, and other divisions and departments of the City and the County that A collaborate on neighborhood preservation, on those areas or neighborhoods. 0 N This is not an issue unique to the City. Other cities are grappling with this same issue. The National Neighborhood Indicators Partnership, for example, is a `o .2 collaborative effort by the Urban Institute and local partners in 29 cities (including N Oakland and Sacramento), established to further the development and use of N neighborhood information systems in local policy making and community building. All of these 29 cities have built (or are building) advanced information systems with ur c E E recurrently updated data on various neighborhood conditions in their cities. These 29 rn n M cities have overcome the resistance of major local public agencies to sharing 0 0 administrative data and, they have shown that such systems can be operated on an 'o ongoing basis at a level that can be locally self-sustaining. c d E These 29 cities have found that the timeliness and geographic detail of local v 0 w c data sources are critical in accurately identifying and effectively addressing urban 0 0 issues. This includes a range of data as noted in the table below. L) 0 c Electric shutoffs Building permits Water shutoffs Property tax assessments c Subsidized childcare Foreclosures m m Business licenses Student absences � Student proficiency Student free/reduced price lunch y Free/reduced price lunch Extent of public assistance (TANF, food stamps, ao Medicaid etc.) m Property sales (volume and price) Number of public housing units Reported crime Part I) 911 calls for service E E u m a Matrix Consulting Group Page 165 PacketPg.826 CITY OF SAN BERNARDINO, CALIFORNIA Management Study of the Code Enforcement Division m These data sets will not be able to be readily collected by the Division, and 0 v some of these data sets are probably not worth the effort to obtain the data from other w 0 T local or state governments. Other data, such as reported crime, 911 calls for service, N foreclosures, water shutoffs, etc. can be readily collected. a E d This data, in addition to the volume of code enforcement violations, can be c m collected by the Division to work with the Planning Division in the development of a 0 N N neighborhood needs assessment and the identification of those neighborhoods that should be the primary focus of the Division. However, the needs assessment is o A intended to not only determine which neighborhoods that the Division should focus its N efforts on, but also the type and range of assistance that the Division should bring to A N those neighborhoods. After all, the Division cannot address the range of problems in these neighborhoods by itself. It needs the assistance of other divisions and N d departments in the City, County agencies, the school district, etc. rn E m c The Division should work with the Planning Division in the development of c 0 neighborhood revitalization plans in collaboration with other divisions and departments .T 0 in the City, County agencies, the school district, etc. The Planning Division should have v E the lead in the development of these plans, however. 0 w C The plans should consider a number of elements including the following: w d 0 0 Boundaries —The boundaries of the designated neighborhood; u 0 c • Demographic criteria — The demographic characteristics of the area (statistics about the residents of the community) including zoning, total housing units, population, etc.; m c m • Consultation — The consultative approach to be utilized in working with the u r m neighborhood stakeholders (input from the residents, business owners, non- m profit organizations, community groups and churches located in the designated neighborhood); E s 0 a Matrix Consulting Group Page 166 Packet Pg.827 CITY OF SAN BERNARDINO, CALIFORNIA Management Study of the Code Enforcement Division m 0 0 Assessment — An assessment of the conditions of the neighborhood based d upon data collected by the Division such as median family income, reported crime, 911 calls for service, foreclosures, vacant units, water shutoffs, owner- r occupied units, etc.; rn Neighborhood revitalization — The plan to revitalize the neighborhood using a collaborative approach; and E m R • Performance measurements — How to identify progress that is readily measurable. 0 N N The plan could include focused housing rehabilitation investments by CDBG, grants by CDBG for housing rehabilitation, the use of CDBG funds for streetscape `o .y improvements, focused crime suppression and prevention, the use of cross-functional N teams (i.e., Operation Phoenix) to target challenging properties, increased legal N prosecution of violations of property, nuisance, and building maintenance codes, the a use of neighborhood cleanup days sponsored by the Integrated Waste Division, etc. c 0 E The development of the neighborhood revitalization plans is designed to provide rn M c a collaborative structure to addressing neighborhood revitalization. 0 0 Recommendation #83: The Code Enforcement Division should collect data at the neighborhood-level to identify the neighborhoods in the City with the greatest o need for public sector intervention. d E Recommendation #84: The Planning Division should develop neighborhood revitalization plans for those neighborhoods in the City that are in the greatest 0 need of public sector intervention. w m 0 0 Recommendation #85: The development of the neighborhood revitalization plans U 0 should be based upon a collaborative effort include the Community Development E Department, Office of the City Manager, Police Department, Fire Department, Office of the City Attorney, Parks and Recreation Department, and Public Works d Department. m c m rn ro m c m E r U A Q Matrix Consulting Group Page 167 Packet Pg.828 r: CITY OF SAN BERNARDINO, CALIFORNIA Management Study of the Code Enforcement Division 0 2. THE CODE ENFORCEMENT DIVISION SHOULD INCREASE THE EXTENT 0 OF PROACTIVE CODE ENFORCEMENT. 0 w Traditionally, Code Enforcement in cities operates largely on a complaint-driven 0 v basis, with limited opportunities to provide door-to-door inspections. However, as the y d table below indicates, some of the cities included in the comparative survey have E m @ developed extensive programs of proactive enforcement. 0 Moreno Santa San � Pasadena Riverside Ontario Valley Pomona Ana Fontana Bernardino Proportion Unknown 40% 0% 3% 33% 40% 15% 19% (%)ofcode enforcement o cases that A are proactive > 0 0' Important points to note regarding proactive code enforcement by these seven (7) n cities and by San Bernardino are presented below. v Pasadena did not know what proportion of their code enforcement cases were N proactive versus reactive. v E m Three (3) cities had extensive levels of proactive code enforcement in terms of the proportion of their code enforcement cases were proactive versus reactive. This included Riverside, Pomona, and Santa Ana. In these three (3) cities, proactive cases ranged from 33% to 40% of the total cases. 2 Three (3) cites had low levels of proactive code enforcement including San ° c Bernardino, Fontana, and Moreno Valley. In these three (3) cities, proactive cases ranged from 3% to 19% of the total cases. g `o w Overall, the proportion of proactive enforcement in San Bernardino represents a w d a lower proportion of the total caseload compared to Riverside, Pomona, and Santa Ana, 0 0 c but more than Ontario, Moreno Valley, and Fontana. Proactive enforcement is a best v @ c practice for code enforcement. m c @ The proactive code enforcement data from 2010 indicates that many Code m m Compliance Officers generated few proactive code enforcement cases (see the table c m E L V Q Matrix Consulting Group Page 168 PacketPg.9281_ S.A.a CITY OF SAN BERNARDINO, CALIFORNIA Management Study of the Code Enforcement Division v below). This excludes the single-family inspection, multi-family inspection, and 72-hour 0 v parking citations. `o a Number of Proactive Cases 'O Employee Class Title Opened in 2010 rn M. Jiles Code Compliance Officer 202 c 0 D. Fuentes Code Compliance Officer 66 E J. Neubert Code Compliance Officer 65 R K. Rohleder Code Compliance Officer 51 D. Sermeno Code Compliance Officer 49 D. Burks Code Compliance Officer 47 E. Lithen Code Compliance Officer 44 C. Rios Code Compliance Officer 44 J. Slouka Code Compliance Officer 43 0 M. Sellin er Code Compliance Officer 42 24 m M. Neville Code Compliance Officer 39 a R. Hickerson Code Compliance Officer 35 N R. Cravens Code Compliance Officer 30 N P. Rowland Code Compliance Officer 27 r V.Williams Code Compliance Officer 23 •o H. Milke Code Compliance Officer 19 rn /^ R. Daugherty Code Compliance Officer 15 E`✓i m J. Mansfield Code Compliance Supervisor 12 E 0 R. Houts Code Compliance Supervisor 11 K. Sartin Code Compliance Supervisor 5 R C.Stone Sr. Code Compliance Officer 3 0 J. Beals Code Compliance Officer 2 .T W. Cunnin ham Code Compliance Officer 1 'p P. Johns Code Compliance Officer 1 c v S. Thompson Code Compliance Officer 1 E 0 TOTAL 877 0 c Five (5) Code Compliance Officers generated almost one-half of the proactive cases in d v 0 2010. 0 c When the Division moves to the assignment of its Code Compliance Officers by v geographical areas, it should hold each Code Compliance Officer accountable for m R N generating not less than 40% of their caseload proactively, excluding single-family m M rentals, multi-family rentals, 72-hour parking citations, and discretionary permit E L Matrix Consulting Group Page 169 Packet Pg.830 CITY OF SAN BERNARDINO, CALIFORNIA Management Study of the Code Enforcement Division d conditions annual inspections. The Code Compliance Officer with a special assignment 0 Q (Crime Free Rental Housing) should be exempted from this requirement. `o r The manager and supervisors of the Division should hold these Code N Compliance Officers accountable for achieving this objective, and take disciplinary 0 E d action for consistent failure to substantively meet this objective. Recommendation #86: The Code Enforcement Division should set an objective for each Code Compliance Officer of generating not less than 40% of their caseload proactively, excluding single-family rentals, multi-family rentals, 72- hour parking citations, and discretionary permit conditions annual inspections. 0 Recommendation #87: The Code Compliance Officer with a special assignment 24 (Crime Free Rental Housing) should be exempted from this requirement. N Recommendation #88: The manager and supervisors of the Code Enforcement Division should hold the Code Compliance Officers accountable for achieving N this objective, and take disciplinary action for consistent failure to substantively meet this objective. N C 3. THE CODE ENFORCEMENT DIVISION SHOULD DEVELOP A FORMAL £ WRITTEN PRIORITY PROCEDURE THAT RANKS CODE VIOLATION "o COMPLAINTS IN ORDER OF PRIORITY AND SCHEDULES INSPECTIONS "c BASED UPON THOSE PRIORITIES. c 0 The Code Enforcement Division does not have a formal written priority 'o procedure that ranks code violation complaints in order of priority and schedule d E inspections accordingly (e.g., respond to Police Department referrals within one 0 workday).. m 0 0 A possible set of guidelines for prioritization of code enforcement violations is U 0 c presented in the table below. A d m c A N m m C d E t V N Q Matrix Consulting Group Page 170 PacketPg.831 8.A.a CITY OF SAN BERNARDINO, CALIFORNIA Management Study of the Code Enforcement Division u 0 © O U u Priority Description of Priority `o High Imminent likelihood of or actual bodily harm,damage to public resources or facilities, damage to real or personal property, public health exposure, or environmental damage ' or contamination;or w Sites or persons responsible have a history of high or moderate risk violations a E u Moderate Risk of bodily harm, damage to public resources or facilities, damage to real or personal property, or environmental damage or contamination; or m Sites or persons responsible have a history of low risk violations;or � There are ongoing moderate or low risk violations; or c More than five wrecked,dismantled or inoperative vehicles are found. Low Violation is non-emergent, does not fit within the high risk or moderate risk categories, and has only minor public impacts; and It 0 Violation is an isolated incident. 'y 0 These priorities should be modified as necessary by the Code Enforcement N Division, and then adopted in a formal written procedure developed by the Division. N T The priorities should include deadlines for the first site visit (i.e., high priority cases will v, ® receive an initial site visit within one (1) workday of assignment of the case to a Code d E Compliance Officer) and for issuance of the Notice of Violation, if warranted (i.e., a m Notice of Violation shall be issued for high priority cases, if warranted, within five (5) o 0 workdays after assignment of the case to the Code Compliance Officer). o The Code Compliance supervisors should assign these priorities when the case v u is assigned to a Code Compliance Officer. The Code Enforcement Division Manager c w should provide training to all of the Code Compliance Officers in these priorities and a 0 U their implications in terms of the timing or deadlines for the first site visit and the °c 'v closure of the case. d m Recommendation #89: The Code Enforcement Division should develop a formal written priority procedure that ranks code violation complaints in order of T priority. m c 0 E r U A Q Matrix Consulting Group Page 171 Packet Pg. 832 8.A.a CITY OF SAN BERNARDINO, CALIFORNIA Management Study of the Code Enforcement Division N Recommendation #90: The formal written priority procedure should include 0 deadlines for the first site visit and for issuance of the Notice of Violation, if warranted. 0 T Recommendation #91: The supervisors of the Code Enforcement Division should assign these priorities when the case is assigned to a Code Compliance Officer. n c d Recommendation #92: The Code Enforcement Division Manager should provide E training to all of the Code Compliance Officers in these priorities and their implications in terms of the timing or deadlines for the first site visit and the issuance of a Notice of Violation, if warranted. 0 4. THE MANAGEMENT OF THE CODE ENFORCEMENT CASELOAD BY CODE COMPLIANCE SUPERVISORS SHOULD BE IMPROVED. c 0 A number of measures indicate the effectiveness of the management and "- d rY supervision of the code enforcement caseload needs to be enhanced. Examples of N C� these measures are presented below. N T 9 The workload allocation among Code Compliance Officers - in terms of ' cases assigned to these Code Compliance Officers - varied significantly c and the overall productivity of the Code Compliance Officers did not meet E metrics. The workload for Code Compliance Officers varied from as much as rn 1,748 cases for one Code Compliance Officer (mostly rental inspection cases) c to as little as 1 case for another Code Compliance Officer. There is substantial imbalance in workload. In many instances, Code Compliance Officers are `o clearly not working a full-time caseload. In fact, the overall level of productivity if A the Code Compliance Officers amounts to 60%, with the productivity of some o Code Compliance Officers as low as 20%. Overall, the Code Compliance Officers in the Division are underutilized. E m U L • Altogether, the amount of calendar days required to close code enforcement cases meets some of the metrics used by the Matrix W Consulting Group, but largely exceeds the benchmarks for 1s` site visit g and case closure in most instances. For property maintenance cases, for U example, it required 20 calendar days at the median for the first site visit and 39 =_ calendar days at the median to close the case. Of note, however, it required an average of almost 44 calendar days for the first site visit and 54 calendar days at the 75" percentile. m c m ur • The Code Enforcement Division does not have an effective methodology m for addressing chronic offenders. This includes cases with repeated hazardous condition, sub-standard, and property maintenance violations. v E L u m Q Matrix Consulting Group Page 172 Packet Pg. 633 CITY OF SAN BERNARDINO, CALIFORNIA Management Study of the Code Enforcement Division d Cases are not being promptly assigned to Code Compliance Officers by 0 Code Compliance Supervisors. A review of code enforcement cases found a number of cases that had not yet been assigned to Code Compliance Officers for as much as four months after the case had been received. 0 T 'O J Overall, the effectiveness of the management and supervision of the Division n v and its caseload needs significant enhancement. The steps that should be taken to E rn A achieve this, other than other recommendations contained elsewhere in this report, are presented below. (1) The Code Enforcement Division Should Establish And Implement Metrics For Case Intake and Case Assignment to a Code Compliance Officer. $ An As noted previously, cases are not being promptly assigned to Code N Compliance Officers by Code Compliance Supervisors. A review of code enforcement ;, N cases found a number of cases that had not yet been assigned to Code Compliance Officers for as much as four months after the case had been received. u, c m Delays in case assignment and distribution create a rippling effect of extending o E m c elapsed case closure times. The time lapse while cases are waiting to be assigned and c 0 distributed to the Code Compliance Officer is "dead time". During this waiting time, no An 2 'o review, investigation, or analysis can be done on the case. E The Code Compliance supervisors should assign cases to their team of Code 0 0 `c Compliance Officers upon receipt of the case, not less than one workday after receipt w d v 0 of the case. This metric should be formally adopted in a case initiation and assignment 0 c procedure developed by the Code Enforcement Division Manager. d Recommendation #93: The Code Enforcement Division Manager should develop 00 and adopt a written Division procedure for the timeliness of case assignment N and distribution after case intake. to Recommendation #94: The Code Enforcement Division should establish a metric that requires the assignment of new cases by the Code Compliance supervisors E t a Matrix Consulting Group Page 173 PacketPg.834 B.A.a 'tTrr CITY OF SAN BERNARDINO, CALIFORNIA Management Study of the Code Enforcement Division d to the appropriate Code Compliance Officer within one (1) workday after receipt of the case from the complainant. z Recommendation #95: The Code Enforcement Division Manager should hold the 0 Code Compliance supervisors accountable for meeting the timeline for assignment of the case to the Code Compliance Officer within one (1) workday �+ after intake of the case from the complainant. m E m (2) The Code Enforcement Division Should Establish Metrics For the m Processing of Cases By Code Compliance Officers. The Division should develop metrics for the amount of calendar days for the N processing, investigation, and closure of code enforcement cases. The metrics should: 0 0 • Validate timelines for the processing of cases and enable quick identification of .4 cases that are experiencing processing delays; N • Identify complex cases early in the process to allow for processing adjustments, such as consultation with the Planning Division, Police Department, Office of the City Attorney, etc.; • Present staff with a direction and goal for results and timeliness of their work; u, c f E • Create an effective management tool to measure and monitor staff performance; m m and c m • Provide a justifiable and accurate source for staffing and budgetary decisions. `o .y Metrics should be established for the length of time -- in calendar days -- o required to process cases from the date case is received to the date of the case E d U closure. Recommended metrics for these cycle time objectives are presented in the W table below. a 0 U 0 c v Fc d m c m y m m c v E z l m Matrix Consulting Group Page 174 PacketPg.835 i CITY OF SAN BERNARDINO, CALIFORNIA Management Study of the Code Enforcement Division m 0 O Amount of U v Metric Calendar Days $ Number of calendar days from case receipt to `o volunta ry compliance �. Property maintenance, zoning, nuisance abatement, etc. cases 30 calendar da s ur Sub-standard housing and dangerous m building cases 60 calendar da s E Number of calendar days from case receipt to rn forced com liance c Property maintenance,zoning, nuisance abatement, etc. cases 90 calendar days Sub-standard housing and dangerous n building cases 120 calendar days Number of calendar days from case receipt to first site visit and initial investigation 3 calendar days c 0 A The Code Enforcement Division should adopt these metrics as performance z measures for the handling and processing of cases by Code Compliance Officers. This v N metric should be formally adopted in a case handling procedure developed by the v Code Enforcement Division Manager. y c Recommendation #96: The Code Enforcement Division Manager should develop E and adopt a written Division procedure for metrics for case handling and processing by Code Compliance Officers after assignment of new cases to the Code Compliance Officers. c 0 .y Recommendation #97: The Code Enforcement Division should adopt the metrics as recommended within this report for case handling and processing by Code Compliance Officers including (1) an initial site visit I investigation and (2) the E case closure for voluntary compliance and forced compliance. `o Recommendation #98: The Code Enforcement Division Manager should hold the w` Code Compliance supervisors accountable for assuring that their assigned Code v" Compliance Officers consistently meet these metrics. c0 0 c (3) The Code Compliance Supervisors Should Be Clearly Assigned the Responsibility to Resolve Delays in the Processing of Cases. "c 0 m The Code Enforcement Division should clearly assign responsibility for (n managing the code enforcement process. The Code Compliance supervisors should clearly be assigned responsibility for managing the processing of code enforcement E E Q Matrix Consulting Group Page 175 Packet Pg:836 CITY OF SAN BERNARDINO, CALIFORNIA Management Study of the Code Enforcement Division m cases by the Code Compliance Officers assigned to their supervision. The o U m responsibilities that the Code Compliance supervisors would need to exercise in `o fulfilling this responsibility are identified in the paragraphs below. U) • Monitoring the compliance of Code Compliance Officers with adopted cycle time v objectives for processing code enforcement cases, and working with the E appropriate Code Compliance Officers to resolve performance problems; c m • Resolving problems that may be encountered by Code Compliance Officers in closing cases such as inter-departmental coordination; • Intervening in cases to resolve problems as appropriate; and 0 0 Promptly notifying Code Compliance Officers of omissions or problems with their .a assigned cases i.e. failure to meet cycle time objective metrics, and working with the Code Compliance Officers to resolve delays. N In summary, the Code Compliance supervisors should function as an active T supervisor for processing of code enforcement cases. The Code Compliance N supervisors would be responsible for keeping the processing of code enforcement E m cases on track, making sure issues involving lack of clarity of ordinance or regulatory "c issues are resolved, charting a clear course for the Code Compliance Officer through g A the case investigation process, and making sure issues regarding the case are o c m identified early in the process. E d u This authority and responsibility should be clearly spelled in a written procedure c W developed by the Code Enforcement Division Manager. c U Recommendation #99: The Code Compliance supervisors should clearly be =_ assigned responsibility for active supervision of the investigation and closure of R code enforcement cases. E v m Recommendation #100: The Code Compliance supervisors should be assigned N responsibility for the supervision of the processing of code enforcement cases. m This should include the performance of Code Compliance Officers in accordance with adopted timeliness metrics including the resolution of problems with c metrics for the processing of cases. E E U N Q Matrix Consulting Group Page 176 Packet Pg. 837 8.Aa CITY OF SAN BERNARDINO, CALIFORNIA Management Study of the Code Enforcement Division v 0 0 Recommendation #101: The Code Enforcement Division Manager should clearly ) spell out the responsibility of the Code Compliance supervisors for the active w supervision of the processing, investigation, and closure of cases by their a assigned Code Compliance Officers in a written procedure. N Recommendation #102: The City should hold the Code Compliance supervisors v responsible for meeting the timeline metrics for the processing, investigation, E and closure of cases by their assigned Code Compliance Officers, and for M monitoring their performance against the timeline metrics on an ongoing basis. C M (4) The Role of the Code Compliance Officers for the Processing, investigation, and Closure of Cases Should Be Clarified In a Written Procedure. c 0 There are three key aspects of case management that leading code d z enforcement organizations use to support an organized approach to management of w o� the code enforcement processing, investigation, and closure process. These are (1) N T providing a single point of contact for complainants, (2) having dedicated case rn managers for code enforcement cases, and (3) monitoring cycle time objectives. These E are described below. Single Point of Contact — A single point of contact is a Code Compliance c Officer assigned to a particular case, and that Code Compliance Officer is :A accessible to the complainant for any questions regarding the case, c investigation, and closure. d E • Dedicated Case Managers — Similar to a single point of contact, dedicated 0 case managers or Code Compliance Officers are assigned to each case. These Code Compliance Officers are responsible for taking an active role in managing w` 0 the case through the processing, investigation, and closure process in v 0 accordance with cycle time objectives. u 0 c Monitoring Cycle Time Objectives — The Code Compliance Officer monitors A and manages the time it takes to process a case from the time the case is d assigned to the time the case is closed in comparison to adopted cycle time m objectives for the cases. `m N • Coordination of a Multi-Disciplined Team in the Processing, Investigation, and Closure of Cases - The case manager or Code Compliance Officer should be responsible for complete and timely communication among the multi- E t U A Q Matrix Consulting Group Page 177 Packet Pg..838`" i CITY OF SAN BERNARDINO, CALIFORNIA Management Study of the Code Enforcement Division v disciplinary team (Le., Police, Fire, Public Works, Office of the City Attorney, etc. o The case manager or Code Compliance Officer makes sure communications d occurs on the multi-disci ling team a schedule is set for closure p nary e of the case, and complex issues are resolved, such as when interpretation of codes. The job 0 of the case manager or Code Compliance Officer is to keep the processing of the case coordinated, predictable, and timely. n v The Code Compliance Officer should be responsible for managing all aspects of E m R a code enforcement case including being the single point of contact for complainants, managing the timeliness of the processing of the case in accordance with adopted N metrics, taking an active role in managing the case through the process including c 0 resolving delays in the processing of the case, and coordinating a multi-disciplined d team in the rocessin p g, investigation, and closure of cases when voluntary compliance N o has clearly been achieved or forced compliance is clearly achieved. N T While the Division already utilizes a case manager system for code enforcement y cases, the parameters and authority of the case manager (or the Code Compliance E rn Officers) need to be clarified and defined in a written procedure. A Recommendation #103: The Code Compliance Officers in the Code Enforcement o Division should be responsible for the management of the processing, La investigation and closure of assigned cases as case managers responsible for c managing all aspects of a code enforcement case including being the single d point of contact for complainants, managing the timeliness of the processing of E the case in accordance with adopted metrics, taking an active role in managing the case through the process including resolving delays in the processing of the 0 case, and coordinating a multi-disciplined team in the processing, investigation, w and closure of cases when voluntary compliance has clearly been achieved or 0 forced compliance is clearly achieved. U 0 c Recommendation #104: The Code Enforcement Division Manager should clearly spell out the authority and responsibility of the Code Compliance Officers as d case managers with responsibility for the processing, investigation, and closure m of cases in a formal written procedure. `m N m m C E E r � m Q Matrix Consulting Group Page 178 Packet Pg.839 CITY OF SAN BERNARDINO, CALIFORNIA Management Study of the Code Enforcement Division m (5) The Code Compliance Supervisors Should Plan and Schedule the o Processing, Investigation, and Closure of Cases Assigned to Code 0 Compliance Officers Under Their Supervision. 0 The Code Compliance supervisors should review incoming cases received by N the Code Enforcement Division and analyze case characteristics, focusing in particular E v on potential processing difficulties. Once difficulties are identified, the Code Compliance supervisors would set cycle time objectives for their assigned Code 0 Compliance Officers as follows: (1) overall staff hours allocated to process the case; and (2) cycle time objectives for completing the processing, investigation, and closure $ .2 of the case. The Code Compliance supervisors would review the most recent open N case inventory report in GOEnforce information system and note the workload of Code N Compliance Officers. Cases would then be assigned as appropriate. The Code $ Compliance supervisors would case to the appropriate Code Compliance Officer and w d E the scheduled date for completing the processing and investigation of the case (or c closing the case) and the amount of staff hours allocated for closing the case. M c 0 When cases are first assigned, the Code Compliance Officer to whom the case .L a is assigned would review the targets (cycle time objectives and staff hour allocations) d E established for the case. If the Code Compliance Officer feels that the targets are 0 unreasonable after a review of the case, the Code Compliance Officer should discuss W m 0 them with their Code Compliance supervisor and negotiate appropriate changes. U 0 c Recommendation #105: The Code Compliance supervisors should plan and schedule the processing, investigation, and closure of cases using the d GOEnforce information system. to c m rn m m E E L U A Q Matrix Consulting Group Page 179 Packet Pg.840.- CITY OF SAN BERNARDINO, CALIFORNIA Management Study of the Code Enforcement Division Y (6) The Code Compliance Supervisors Should Monitor And Maintain Case o Assignment and Case Status Information Versus the Plan and Schedule v Using the GOEnforce Information System. 0 The Code Compliance supervisors should monitor and manage the processing N of cases assigned to the Code Compliance Officers under their supervision by using d E m the GOEnforce information system. The Code Compliance supervisors should use this c m information system to manage the processing of cases including: 0 • Tracking the progress of Code Compliance Officers in completing the processing and investigation of assigned cases; and c 0 Using the system to improve the Code Compliance supervisors ability to manage the workload of their assigned Code Compliance Officers. N Accurate data on workload, by case type, cyclical variances in activity, and ;, N workload activity Code Compliance Officer are all essential supervisory tools. With this v information, supervisors can make informed, logical decisions regarding case y c m E assignments, hold their staff accountable, and, in turn, be held accountable themselves. rn A c On a monthly basis, the Code Compliance supervisors should be required to 0 0 audit the caseload assigned to each of the Code Compliance Officers assigned to their y 2 o supervision to determine whether these cases are being effectively and timely c N E processed, investigated and closed or whether discussions should be held with the u `o w Code Compliance Officer regarding their performance. w v v 0 Recommendation #106: The Code Compliance supervisors should monitor and U maintain case assignment and case status information versus the plan and schedule using the GOEnforce information system. R Recommendation #107: The Code Enforcement Division Manager should develop m a written procedure that requires the Code Compliance supervisors to audit the n caseload assigned to each of the Code Compliance Officers under their supervision to determine to determine whether cases are being effectively and timely processed, investigated and closed or whether discussions should be held with the Code Compliance Officer regarding their performance. E r 0 a Matrix Consulting Group Page 180 Packet Pg.:84t. S.A.a CITY OF SAN BERNARDINO, CALIFORNIA Management Study of the Code Enforcement Division 0 v 0 L.- (7) The Code Enforcement Division Should Adopt Productivity Metrics for the a Code Compliance Officers. `o As noted previously, the workload allocation in 2010 among Code Compliance i N Officers — in terms of cases assigned to these Code Compliance Officers — varied v E significantly, and the overall productivity of the Code Compliance Officers did not meet metrics. The workload for Code Compliance Officers varied from as much as 1,748 cases for one Code Compliance Officer (mostly rental inspection cases) to as little as 1 case for another Code Compliance Officer. There is substantial imbalance in workload. o An In many instances, Code Compliance Officers are clearly not working a full-time N caseload. In fact, the overall level of productivity if the Code Compliance Officers ;, N amounts to 60% in 2010, with the productivity of some Code Compliance Officers as low as 20%. Overall, the Code Compliance Officers in the Division are underutilized. w Q E The Code Enforcement Division should adopt productivity metrics for the Code m c Compliance Officers. Recommended productivity metrics are presented in the table 0 0 below. 2 c Type of Productivity Metric Metric v E v U Number of complaint-based or proactive code 50 active or open cases at any one time or a total `o enforcement complaints assigned to a Code of 600 cases per year per Code Compliance Compliance Officer Officer w 0 v 0 Single-Family Rental and Multi-Family Rental 12 to 15 rental inspections per day or 2,760 to v Inspections 3,450 inspections per year per Code Compliance oc Officer o c The productivity metric for active complaint-based or proactive cases per Code m c Compliance Officers presumes the active management of this caseload by Code M' m Compliance Officers and the active monitoring and supervision of Code Compliance d © Officers by Code Compliance supervisors. a Matrix Consulting Group Page 181 Packe4Pg.842 CITY OF SAN BERNARDINO, CALIFORNIA Management Study of the Code Enforcement Division v Recommendation #108: The Code Enforcement Division should adopt 'o productivity metrics for the Code Compliance Officers as recommended within ) the report. r 0 Recommendation #109: The Code Compliance Officers should be held accountable by the Code Compliance supervisors for consistently meeting this m metric. E v (8) The Code Enforcement Division Should Utilize More Aggressive Tools to m Address Chronic Violators. R The Code Enforcement Division does not have an effective methodology for w addressing properties with repeated multiple violations. In 2010, there were numerous c 0 properties with 3 or more violations. This includes cases with repeated hazardous A d o✓ condition, sub-standard, and property maintenance violations. An example of code N C6 enforcement violations for a property with multiple violations is presented in the exhibit N following this page. y Chronic problem properties, by nature, are toxic to the whole community system. E E m The entire neighborhood is hurt by a chronic problem property. All property values are c lowered a little in the surrounding neighborhood, and the quality of life for all decreases o` Mn when blight and fear conditions are introduced.16 Michael Greenberg, in the article c Improving Neighborhood Quality: A Hierarchy of Needs, found City residents believe E d 0 neighborhoods will only improve if crime and physical blight are controlled. In a survey 0 w U of 306 New Jersey residents, respondents stated the absence of crime and dew is o U required for neighborhood to be considered excellent. These two factors were far more =_ 'v A important than others such as quality of public services, improving schools, etC.37 a m c co m m '6 City Council Research Report, Chronic Problem Properties in Saint Paul: Case Study Lessons, 2002 y 37 Michael Greenberg. "Improving Neighborhood Quality: A Hierarchy of Needs." Housing Policy Debate. E Volume 10, Issue 3 t U A Q Matrix Consulting Group Page 182 Packet Pg.843 JJ 8.A.a CITY OF SAN BERNARDINO, CALIFORNIA Management Study of the Code Enforcement Division m Exhibit 12 u z Examples of Properties With o Multiple Violations in 2010 U) Code Compliance Date Case Date Case No. of Officer Opened Case Type Address Closed Violations E D. Puentes 26-Jan-10 Property 1260 Lugo Ave 11-Feb-10 4 rn Maintenance c H. Mielke 9-Jun-10 Multi-Family 1260 Lugo Ave 3-Mar-11 12 Inspection J. Neubert 15-Jun-10 Hazardous 1260 Lugo Ave 21-Jun-10 1 Condition " C. Rios 27-Jul-10 Sub-Standard 1260 Lugo Ave 13-Sep-10 0 Housing J. Slouka 5-Oct-10 Hazardous 1260 Lugo Ave 3-Mar-11 5 °- Condition a D. Fuentes 26-Jan-10 Property 1260 Lugo Ave 11-Feb-10 4 Maintenance N P.Johns 3-May-10 Rental 1306 N F St 7-Jun-10 2 a, Inspection J. Neubert 26-Apr-10 Hazardous 1306 N F St 22-Jul-10 6 >, ConditionO 3 J. Farrell 13-Dec-10 Hazardous 1306 N F St 17-May-11 9 m Condition = D. Fuentes 13-Apr-10 Property 1477 Lugo Ave 18-May-10 7 E Maintenance m P. Rowland 26Jul-10 Rental 1477 Lugo Ave 17-Aug-10 0 c Ins ection V.Williams 29-Nov-10 Hazardous 1477 Lugo Ave 31-May-11 13 c Condition 2 .y D. Burks 25-Jan-10 Sub-Standard 369 E Rialto Ave 10-Feb-10 2 > Housing 6 D. Burks 8-Mar-10 Sub-Standard 369 E Rialto Ave 1-Jun-10 10 w Housin E D. Burks 24-May-10 Sub-Standard 369 E Rialto Ave 22-Jul-10 3 Housin `o D. Burks 30-Aug-10 Property 369 E Rialto Ave 31-Aug-10 0 w` Maintenance d v S.Thompson 7-Jul-10 Rental 396E 17th St 11-Apr-11 3 ° Inspection 0 0 R Cravens 4-Aug-10 Property 396 E 17th St 11-Jan-11 5 ` Maintenance P.Johns 20-Sep-10 Rental 396 E 17th St 17-May-11 2 E Inspection m P.Johns 12-Jul-10 Rental 430 W 16th St 14-Apr-11 4 Inspection N J. Neubert 27-Sep-10 Hazardous 430 W 16th St 11-Jan-11 9 m Condition J. Neubert 7-Oct-10 Hazardous 430/432 W 16th St 11-Jan-11 8 c Condition E E r ° m Q Matrix Consulting Group Page 183 PacketPg.844 CITY OF SAN BERNARDINO, CALIFORNIA Management Study of the Code Enforcement Division m v 0 Curing chronic problem properties is an expensive business. Not curing chronic d r problem properties is more expensive. Curing these chronic problems requires a full T 9 3 set of tools. This full set of tools includes examples such as those noted below. n c d • Proactive inspection by the Code Enforcement Division. The first, and E perhaps the most important, thing government needs to do with respect to A chronic problem properties is to become aware of them. If a complaint-based method of code enforcement is being used, then a city relies primarily upon occupants and neighbors to alert it about problems. With a proactive approach, N a city becomes aware of problems that may go unreported and can become _ aware of these problems much sooner. c 0 Issuance of Administrative Civil Penalties. In 2010, the Code Enforcement An Division issued only 48 administrative civil penalties (based upon data from GOEnforce). By mid-November 2011, the Code Enforcement Division issued N only 26 administrative civil penalties (based upon data from GOEnforce). There is a distinct tendency of Code Compliance Officers I the Code Enforcement N Division to use the typical "tool' set for correcting violations, and rarely use of administrative civil penalties as a first or second resort in dealing with chronic problem properties. This response by staff in the field is reflective of their experience working with given properties, people and situations. Issuance of £ administrative civil penalties is, in their experience, more likely. A c Maintain an Inventory of All Properties with Three or More Discrete 2 Violations in One Calendar Year. The Code Enforcement Division should flag a chronic problem properties in GOEnforce, and a separate inventory should be "- maintained of these properties. Code Enforcement may wish to flag, as chronic o problem properties, all properties that have incurred three or more discrete violations in one calendar year. This would provide all staff with better E information to deal with the problems they are confronting at these properties. 0 w The Code Enforcement Division Should Notify the Police and Fire a Departments of Properties Identified as Chronic Violators. Communication c on issues concerning specific chronic problem properties across different U departments can be spotty. Part of this is likely due to the fact that a chronic E problem property for one department may not be one for another. The Code Enforcement Division should provide a list on a monthly basis of the chronic violators in the City that have incurred three or more discrete violations in one calendar year including their address, the nature of the violations, the date of the N opening of the case by the Division, etc. to the Police and the Fire departments. m The Code Enforcement Division Should Work as a "Case Manager" to Resolve the Problems with these Chronic Violators By Coordinating the E t U A z a Matrix Consulting Group Page 184 PacketPg..645. CITY OF SAN BERNARDINO, CALIFORNIA Management Study of the Code Enforcement Division m Responses of Multiple City Departments. One particular feature of case 0 management is how the Code Enforcement Division would approach its work in t addressing chronic violators. The majority of situations enforcement and service w providing agencies are faced with respond well to standard intervention tools, 0, such as citations, abatements etc. However, the case of chronic problem properties is different, and they require a more "in-depth" approach that takes yr into account the many problems occurring at the property. The Code Enforcement Division should function as a "case manager" for these chronic E violators in which an employee within the Division responsible for coordinating c the entire City's response to properties that are chronic violators. This employee would be responsible for "flagging" the property for all staff who interact with it, as well as working with the owner and other involved parties on plans to resolve the problems by coordinating responses by all of the City's departments as appropriate. This person could also be responsible for gathering appropriate background information for Office of the City Attorney to be used in the pursuing citations, working with the Office of the City Manager in pursuing CDBG block .� grants to improve the property, working with the Police Department to obtain increased preventive patrol, working with the Fire Department to abate Fire N Code violations, etc. N Chronic problem properties are chronic because of the number and complexity of the problems concentrated in the property. It is incumbent upon the Code E E Enforcement Division to minimize and eliminate the chronic problems of these "o A c properties whenever possible - not only to decrease the vast amount of resources the c 0 City spends handling these problems, but to improve the general health, safety and 'o welfare of the City. v E Recommendation #110: The Code Enforcement Division should provide proactive inspection of properties with multiple and discrete violations in one c calendar year to assure the properties do not regress after corrections to code .1 violations have been made. These proactive inspections should not be made any o less than once a month. U 0 c Recommendation #111: The Code Enforcement Division should issue administrative civil penalties as an initial action for properties that have more d than two discrete violation in one calendar year. 0° A Recommendation #112: The Code Enforcement Division should maintain an inventory of all properties with three or more discrete violations in one calendar year. E L U N V Matrix Consulting Group Page 185 Packet Pg.',646-' CITY OF SAN BERNARDINO, CALIFORNIA Management Study of the Code Enforcement Division d Recommendation #113: The Code Enforcement Division should provide a list on 0 a monthly basis of the chronic violators in the City that have incurred three or „ more discrete violations in one calendar year including their address, the nature of the violations, the date of the opening of the case by the Division, etc. to the 0 Police and the Fire departments. N Recommendation #114: The Code Enforcement Division should function as a "case manager" for these chronic violators in which an employee within the v Division responsible for coordinating the entire City's response to properties that are chronic violators. This employee would be responsible for "flagging" the property for all staff who interact with it, as well as working with the owner and other involved parties on plans to resolve the problems by coordinating N responses by all of the City's departments as appropriate. This person could also be responsible for gathering appropriate background information for Office of the City Attorney to be used in the pursuing citations, working with the Office o of the City Manager in pursuing CDBG block grants to improve the property, working with the Police Department to obtain increased preventive patrol, working with the Fire Department to abate Fire Code violations, etc. N C6 5. THE RESPONSIBILITY FOR WEED ABATEMENT SHOULD BE ASSIGNED TO EACH CODE COMPLIANCE OFFICER IN THEIR GEOGRAPHICAL AREA. 3 The weed abatement ro ram of the Code Enforcement Division surveys an n p g y c d E estimated 4,000 properties in the City twice a year: once in the spring and once in the c fall. Based on those inspections, Notices of Violation (or Notices to Clean Regrowth) 2 c 0 are sent twice annually to those properties with overgrown weeds and grasses that are 0 fire hazards or violate property maintenance standards. After these Notices of Violation E are mailed to the property owner, the properties are inspected again to assess the 0 C extent to which violations have been corrected. w v 0 0 An estimated 10% of the properties do not correct their violations. In these o c instances, the Division utilizes a contractor to abate the violation, and then invoices the 9 c `m property owner for the costs of the abatement - $275 per lot. If the property owner does m c R N not pay this invoice, the Division places a lien on the property. The Division verifies that m c E E L U A Q Matrix Consulting Group Page 186 'Packet Pg. 847'- CITY OF SAN BERNARDINO, CALIFORNIA Management Study of the Code Enforcement Division 0 the work performed by the contractor meets the specifications of the contract be 0 d conducting an inspection of the lot including pictures. `0 r An estimated 50% or more are repeat offenders every year; in other words, N these properties are found in violation every year. v E d A number of changes should be made to the weed abatement program. First, the City should not subsidize the cost of this program. In fiscal year 2010- 0 in N 11, the City recovered $168,000 in revenue for the weed abatement program. The landscape contract is budgeted at $108,000 annually, and the cost of the two staff o A assigned to the program — two Code Compliance Officers — amount to approximately N $161,000 annually (salary at top step and fringe benefits at 35% of salary). Overall, the N Division is expending $269,000 annually for the weed abatement program, and v 3 N recovering $168,000 annually, or a cost recovery of approximately 62%. E E Overall, the fees charged by the Division should be increased to fully recover rn c the costs of the weed abatement program. However, the Matrix Consulting Group 2 c 0 recommends that this fee be charged against all vacant lots that are issued Notices of .n a Violation (or Notices to Clean Regrowth), and a higher fee be charged to those E properties that do not comply with these Notices of Violation (or Notices to Clean 0 Regrowth). As reported in the August performance report issued by the Division, the d 0 0 staff dedicated to the program issued 1,887 Notices to Clean Regrowth and surveyed u 0 c 580 vacant lots in violation of high weeds. The Matrix Consulting Group would A d recommend a self-certification program for weed abatement, similar to the single-family m c U) U) rental inspection program. If the property is not found to be in violation, then the o0 m property should automatically be enrolled in a self-certification program. If a E r u m Q Matrix Consulting Group Page 187 Packef Pg.848`- CITY OF SAN BERNARDINO, CALIFORNIA Management Study of the Code Enforcement Division d subsequent complaint or proactive inspection by a Code Compliance Officer finds the 0 v property in violation, the property should be de-certified for two years until consistent w 0 T compliance by the property owner is evident. N The second change that is recommended is that staff of the Code Enforcement m E v Division should not be dedicated exclusively to this program. The responsibility for A inspecting the properties should be assigned to the Code Compliance Officers in the 0 beats or areas that these properties are located. These properties should be identified within GOEnforce (or the new automated information system being deployed for the $ .y Community Development Department). The information system should generate N notices for the inspection of these properties twice a year by the Code Compliance ;, N Officers in whose beats or areas that these properties are located. These Code Compliance Officers should be responsible for working with the City's weed abatement d E contractor to abate weeds on vacant lots in their beats or areas. However, the Code A c Compliance Officers should inspect these properties on an ongoing basis for illegal 2 0 dumping, growth of high weeds, and other possible violations. To assure consistency in 0 the delivery of this program by multiple Code Compliance Officers, the Code d E Enforcement Division Manager should develop a formal written procedure for this 0 0 w c program that describes how these services will be delivered, and provide training to all w d 0 O of the Code Compliance Officers in the procedure. This should occur prior to the u 0 c transfer of these responsibilities. R c `w The third change that is recommended is that the responsibility for preparing m c w and mailing Notices of Violation (or Notices to Clean Regrowth), and invoicing should ro be assigned to the Code Compliance Processing Assistants. This work is more c v E t U A Q Matrix Consulting Group Page 188 PacketPg.849 8.A.a CITY OF SAN BERNARDINO, CALIFORNIA Management Study of the Code Enforcement Division m appropriately assigned to these staff that are responsible for providing administrative v support and customer service duties. In fact, the preparation of violation letters is part 0 T of the class specification for the Code Compliance Processing Assistant. There is y adequate number of Code Compliance Processing Assistants to provide this service. E v Recommendation #115: The City should not subsidize the cost of the weed abatement program. The fees charged by the Code Enforcement Division should be increased to fully recover the costs of the weed abatement program. This fee should be charged against all vacant lots that are issued Notices of Violation (or Notices to Clean Regrowth), and a higher fee be charged to those properties that do not comply with these Notices of Violation (or Notices to Clean Regrowth). _ 0 Recommendation #116: If a vacant property is not found to be in violation of " weed abatement requirements and standards, then the property should automatically be enrolled in a self-certification program. If a subsequent w complaint or proactive inspection by a Code Compliance Officer finds the property in violation, the property should be de-certified for two years until N consistent compliance by the property owner is evident. 3 Recommendation #117: The staff of the Code Enforcement Division should not c be dedicated exclusively to the weed abatement program. The responsibility for £ inspecting the vacant properties should be assigned to the Code Compliance Officers in the beats or areas that these vacant properties are located. The Division's information system should generate notices for the inspection of these vacant properties twice a year by the Code Compliance Officers in whose o beats or areas that these properties are located. .y 0 Recommendation #118: To assure consistency in the delivery of the weed d abatement program by multiple Code Compliance Officers, the Code v Enforcement Division Manager should develop a formal written procedure for this program that describes how these services will be delivered, and provide 2 training to all of the Code Compliance Officers in the procedure. This should W v occur prior to the transfer of these responsibilities. g U O Recommendation #119: The Code Compliance Officers should inspect these = vacant properties on an ongoing basis for illegal dumping, growth of high weeds, and other possible violations like any other property in the City's neighborhoods. d m Recommendation #120: The responsibility for preparing and mailing Notices of N Violation (or Notices to Clean Regrowth), and invoicing for contractual weed abatement should be assigned to the Code Compliance Processing Assistants. a E r u m Q Matrix Consulting Group Page 189 Packet Pg. 850 B.A.a CITY OF SAN BERNARDINO, CALIFORNIA Management Study of the Code Enforcement Division v 6. THE EFFECTIVE UTILIZATION OF CODE COMPLIANCE PROCESSING o ASSISTANTS SHOULD BE ENHANCED. m L The manager and supervisors of the Code Enforcement Division uniformly a a described the Code Compliance Processing Assistants as intelligent and capable m c v employees of the Division. v rn A Yet these four (4) Code Compliance Processing Assistants are not effectively utilized for providing administrative support and customer service duties. The class N description provides for the performance of a number of duties that are being c 0 performed by the Code Compliance Officers particularly as it pertains to warrants, the Ma d weed abatement program, etc. The essential duties (as illustrations of the various N C6 types of work that may be performed) for the Code Compliance Processing Assistants N T D are presented below. N c • Receives complaints from the public in person or by telephone regarding a wide E variety of possible City code violations; researches and verifies data on properties involved, assigns complaint numbers and inputs data in the department's computer system; routes complaints to the appropriate section for g investigation; enters requests for release of Notice of Pendency inspections. $ Mn • Assembles materials, verifies property owner information and prepares violation o letters, warrants, notices of hearing, hearing orders administrative citations and other actions; ensures all legal servicing of notices is complete and logged via certified mail to all interested parties; maintains complaint/property files. Q 0 C • Accepts, processes and records payments of fees, liens, citations and other u, d costs; ensures payments are accurately posted to accounts; reviews and o completes documents, ensuring a high degree of accuracy, for the release of vehicles towed by Code Enforcement; closes property / complaint files, ensuring S that all fees liens and release fees have been paid and all violations have been corrected; runs updates of the department system to ensure current, accurate data is available to all department staff. m y • Opens, sorts and distributes mail; performs a variety of administrative support m duties as required. d E r U A Q Matrix Consulting Group Page 190 Packet Pg. 851 tt.A.a CITY OF SAN BERNARDINO,CALIFORNIA Management Study of the Code Enforcement Division m The Division should more effectively utilize the talents and skills of these four (4) 0 d Code Compliance Processing Assistants (including subsequent to the reclassification w 0 T of these four incumbents). V) This should include much of the work of the Code Compliance Officer assigned d E d to weed abatement — the preparing and mailing Notices of Violation (or Notices to Clean Regrowth), and invoicing. 0 N The Compliance Processing Assistants should also be utilized to prepare warrant requests, work that is currently assigned to a Code Compliance Officer. `o 0 • This Code Compliance Officer works full-time, in the office, to prepare warrant requests. There is insufficient work involved in the preparation of warrants to N justify the full-time assignment of a Code Compliance Officer. There were 172 ;, warrants requested in 2010 (based upon data from GOEnforce), and 155 in N 2011 (based upon data from GOEnforce). A full-time Code Compliance Officer is NOT needed to prepare an average of three (3)warrant requests a week. m Secondly, the Code Compliance Processing Assistants have the talents and E err skills to prepare warrant requests, and the preparation of warrant requests is m included in their class specification. Most of the information necessary to prepare the warrant request is available on-line in GOEnforce. g c 0 Overall, the skills and talents of the Code Compliance Processing Assistants .y 2 0 should be utilized more effectively for paraprofessional work (including subsequent to E the reclassification of these four incumbents). The four staff are underutilized. There 2 0 c are a sufficient number of Code Compliance Processing Assistants to perform this w v 0 0 work. L' 0 c Recommendation #121: The Code Compliance Processing Assistants should be utilized more effectively by the Code Enforcement Division for paraprofessional responsibilities and tasks, not just clerical, including, at a minimum, much of the m work of the Code Compliance Officer assigned to weed abatement (the preparing N and mailing Notices of Violation or Notices to Clean Regrowth and invoicing for contractual weed abatement) and the preparation of warrant requests. a E L U t0 Matrix Consulting Group Page 191 Packet Pg. 852 s.a:a CITY OF SAN BERNARDINO, CALIFORNIA Management Study of the Code Enforcement Division v Recommendation #122: The Code Enforcement Division Manager should prepare 0 a written procedure regarding preparation of warrant requests in consultation 0 with the Office of the City Attorney. 0 T Recommendation #123: The Code Compliance Processing Assistants should be provided with training in the preparation of warrant requests before these duties w are transferred to the Code Compliance Processing Assistants. E v 7. THE CODE ENFORCEMENT DIVISION SHOULD DEVELOP A FORMAL WRITTEN PROCEDURE REGARDING THE APPLICATION OF PENALTIES. The actions by the staff of the Code Enforcement Division can lead to penalties N if a property owner does not come into compliance after the time has expired on a 0 0 Notice of Violation. " d m The Code Enforcement Division should develop a procedure to ensure w o consistency in the application of penalties so that different approaches to penalties are T V not utilized by Code Compliance Officers. This procedure can also assist in providing N c clarity to hearing Officers regarding the basis for the application of penalties. E v m Recommendation #124: The Code Enforcement Division should develop a formal m written procedure regarding the application of penalties. c 0 8. THE CODE ENFORCEMENT DIVISION SHOULD ENHANCE THE EXTENT OF FINANCIAL ASSISTANCE AVAILABLE FOR LOW AND MODERATE o INCOME HOMEOWNERS TO BRING THEIR PROPERTY INTO COMPLIANCE WITH THE CITY'S PROPERTY MAINTENANCE ORDINANCE E m 0 As noted earlier in this report, the City has substantive economic challenges. w 0 The Division needs to consider these challenges in seeking compliance with property o L) 0 maintenance standards and other ordinances that the Division enforces. These E 'v A challenges include higher levels of unemployment, lower median household income, v m higher proportions of households with cash public assistance income and food stamps w / SNAP benefits, and higher proportions of households with incomes below the poverty c level in the last twelve months. This data is relevant simply because households in San E s U A Q Matrix Consulting Group Page 192 Packet Pg.,ti53 8.A.a CITY OF SAN BERNARDINO, CALIFORNIA Management Study of the Code Enforcement Division a Bernardino will have greater difficulty with property maintenance and correcting 0 v L violations than other households in other cities. `o T The Code Enforcement Division indicated that resources available to assist low N and moderate-income homeowners are frequently, if not always, exhausted before the 0 E d end of the fiscal year. This included housing rehabilitation loans and grants funded by A EDA. No such funds are currently available from the City's CDBG resources. 0 The Code Enforcement Division Manager should work with the CDBG Coordinator in the City Manager's Office to develop a larger array of financial N resources from CDBG funds available to the City to assist low and moderate-income N homeowners rehabilitate their homes. This should include: Paint loans and grants or loan of up to $4,000 for materials and labor to paint the exterior of a home, including a list of approved painting contractors from n which to obtain estimates. E E • Low interest home repair loans for residents with low to moderate income to repair electrical, roofing, weather-proofing, kitchen remodeling, plumbing, heating, bath remodeling and structural reinforcement. c 0 The Code Enforcement Division cannot merely be a follower in the effort to 'o provide a larger array of financial resources. The Division needs to be a leader in E making sure that these resources are more fully developed and more effectively 0 w publicized to those low and moderate-income homeowners in need including 0 O publicizing these services on the Division's web site and in publications developed by U 0 c v the Division. c d The Code Enforcement Division Manager should also identify non-profit °1 c m N resources available to assist low and moderate-income homeowners in rehabilitating m m their homes and publicize these services on the Division's web site and in publications E r v m a Matrix Consulting Group Page 193 Packet Pg."854 S.A.a CITY OF SAN BERNARDINO, CALIFORNIA Management Study of the Code Enforcement Division m developed by the Division. There are a number of non-profits that work with residents W to provide such services as mowing lawns and removing junk and debris. 0 T Recommendation #125: The Code Enforcement Division Manager should work with the CDBG Coordinator in the City Manager's Office to develop a larger array N of financial resources from CDBG funds available to the City to assist low and d moderate-income homeowners rehabilitate their homes and their businesses. E w rn R Recommendation #126: The Code Enforcement Division more effectively publicize the CDBG financial resources available to low and moderate-income homeowners in need including publicizing these services on the Division's web N site and in publications developed by the Division. 9. THE CODE ENFORCEMENT DIVISION SHOULD ENHANCE ITS o ENFORCEMENT OF THE PROPERTY MAINTENANCE CODE y REQUIREMENTS FOR THE CITY'S ENTRANCES AND ITS PRIMARY THOROUGHFARES N The City has recently devoted significant effort to the beautification of the City. T 9 This included working with other public agencies such as CalTrans to beautify the n City's entrances, and working with local businesses to beautify major thoroughfares. E E m This effort should not be lost over time. The Code Enforcement Division should c M 2 continue to focus its efforts on the promotion of attractive and well-maintained c .T residential and non-residential properties and neighborhoods including publicly-owned o d property in San Bernardino. E 0 The Code Enforcement Division should continue to work with CalTrans to w a beautify the entrances to the City i.e., freeway off ramps and on ramps. If necessary, 0 U the Division should issue Notices of Violation to CalTrans for failure to meet property E maintenance standards. m This same effort should be dedicated to major thoroughfares with the Division N continuing to work with local businesses to maintain compliance with property maintenance standards. E L V A Q Matrix Consulting Group Page 194 Pactcet pg.855 B:A.a CITY OF SAN BERNARDINO, CALIFORNIA Management Study of the Code Enforcement Division a Recommendation #127: The Code Enforcement Division should continue to work 0 with CalTrans to beautify the entrances to the City i.e., freeway off ramps and on = ramps. If necessary, the Division should issue Notices of Violation to CalTrans for failure to meet property maintenance standards. 0 r v Recommendation #128: The Code Enforcement Division should continue to work �+ with local businesses to maintain compliance with property maintenance d standards. v rn A 10. THE CODE ENFORCEMENT DIVISION MANAGER SHOULD PROMOTE A CULTURE WITHIN THE CODE ENFORCEMENT DIVISION OF PARTNERSHIP WITH OTHER CITY DEPARTMENTS. The culture of the Code Enforcement Division appears to be an environment c 0 that fosters an approach to conducting business as if it were an "island" or separate d o: "department" and not effectively working with other City departments. There is N o reluctance on part of Division employees to work as a member of a team with other T a City Department's (or even other divisions in the Community Development n c Department) to address city-wide issues and problems. This includes such programs E E m as the Homeless Advocacy Program in the Police Department, the administration of the Crime Free Ordinance in cooperation with the Police Department, the $ .2 administration of the weed abatement program in cooperation with the Fire Department, o c the enforcement of multi-family rental inspection in cooperation with the Fire E 0 Department, the enforcement of property maintenance standards regarding city owned o w W property in cooperation with the Public Works Department and the Parks and c U O Recreation Department, etc. 5 a A In order to increase the contribution to the City's organizational effectiveness, d m the Division must reconsider how it can add value to the City as a whole by working N more effectively with other City divisions and departments. c The Code Enforcement Division must take on a more proactive, team-minded E L U A Q Matrix Consulting Group Page 195 PackatPg.85§ " 8.A.a CITY OF SAN BERNARDINO, CALIFORNIA Management Study of the Code Enforcement Division v approach, as a partner with the other Departments in the City. This should include 0 a periodic meetings with executive management of other City departments to develop 0 T more effective working relationships with these departments, the deployment of N systems within the Division for enhancing the working relationships with these other d E m departments, and holding the staff of the Division accountable for working positively A with these other departments in the betterment of the City. 0 N Recommendation #129: The Code Enforcement Division Manager should deploy a management style among his / her supervisory team that fosters working with other City divisions and departments for the betterment of the City. o 2 Recommendation #130: The Code Enforcement Division Manager should conduct periodic meetings with executive management of other City N departments to develop more effective working relationships with these ;, departments, the deployment of systems within the Division for enhancing the N working relationships with these other City departments, and holding the staff of the Division accountable for working positively with these other City n departments in the betterment of the City. E E 11. THE POLICE DEPARTMENT SHOULD BE RESPONSIBLE FOR THE rn ENFORCEMENT OF 72-HOUR PARKING REQUIREMENTS ON PUBLIC "c STREETS. c 0 The Code Enforcement Division is allocating a full-time Code Compliance 20 0 Officer for responding to complaints regarding 72-hour parking violations and also E proactively identifying and citing such violations. This is somewhat unusual for other 0 cities as found in the comparative survey conducted by the Matrix Consulting Group as u 0 0 part of this management study (see the table below). u 0 c_ Moreno San 9 Pasadena Riverside Ontario Valley Pomona Santa Ana Fontana Bernardino @ C 72-Hour No No No Yes No No Yes Ves y Parking m Violation Ordinance? y m C 0 E t u m Q Matrix Consulting Group Page 196 Packet Pg. 857 CITY OF SAN BERNARDINO, CALIFORNIA Management Study of the Code Enforcement Division v As the table indicates, five (5) of the other seven (7) cities included in the comparative 0 0 survey do not place responsibility for enforcement of the 72-hour parking enforcement w 0 T with their code enforcement division. U) Most often, cities assign responsibility for their parking enforcement with other d E d city departments. In San Bernardino, the Police Department allocates a number of non- sworn staff to parking enforcement. 0 The Matrix Consulting Group recommends that on-street parking enforcement be the responsibility of the Police Department. The Code Enforcement Division should o .2 continue to be responsible for the enforcement of property maintenance standards that N govern parking on private property. This division of responsibility should be published N on the Code Enforcement Division's and the Police Department's web sites. Recommendation #131: On-street parking enforcement should be the responsibility of the Police Department including 72-hour on street parking E violations. rn Recommendation #132: The Code Enforcement Division should continue to be 2 responsible for the enforcement of property maintenance standards that govern $ parking on private property. A 'o Recommendation #133: This division of responsibility for on-street and off-street E parking enforcement should be published on the Code Enforcement Division's E and the Police Department's web sites. 0 12. THE CITY SHOULD CONSIDER REASSIGNING RESPONSIBILITY FOR m PLACING LIENS ON PROPERTY WITH THE OFFICE OF THE CITY CLERK. g U 0 The Office of the City Clerk has an excellent management team. Part of that =_ 'v m team includes the Business Registration Manager. The Business Registration Manager d m and her division are responsible, in part, for the placement of liens on private property. N However, other City divisions and departments are responsible as well. This includes c the Code Enforcement Division, the Fire Department. E r u A Q Matrix Consulting Group Page 197 PackeCPg.858 CITY OF SAN BERNARDINO, CALIFORNIA Management Study of the Code Enforcement Division 0 The Business Registration Manager developed an excellent analysis of the 0 W City's existing lien process that pointed out a number of shortcomings and identified a 0 T number of potential improvements. 38 These potential improvements should be U) developed as recommendations by the Office of the City Clerk and brought to the City d E v Council for its consideration. These recommendations would streamline the process, A clarify the legal basis for a number of work practices, etc. 0 The Matrix Consulting Group recommends the City consider the centralization of responsibility for the placement of liens on private property with the Office of the City o A .i Clerk. The Office of the City Clerk has more business expertise in this process than the N Code Enforcement Division or the Fire Department. The Office of the City Clerk should N work with the Code Enforcement Division and the Fire Department to document the n workload associated with this reassignment of responsibility, document the staffing d E implications, if any, and bring this issue to the City Council for the consideration of the rn A c City Council. c 0 Recommendation #134: The Office of the City Clerk should bring the potential improvements in the lien process identified by the Business Registration 'c Manager in 2010 to the City Council for its consideration. These recommendations would streamline the lien process, clarify the legal basis for a E number of lien fees and work practices, etc. 0 `c Recommendation #135: The City should consider the centralization of w 0 responsibility for the placement of liens on private property with the Office of the ° 0 City Clerk. The Office of the City Clerk should work with the Code Enforcement U 0 Division and the Fire Department to document the workload associated with this 9 reassignment of responsibility, document the staffing implications, if any, and A bring this issue to the City Council for the consideration of the City Council. m c m M m c m E a8 Cindy Buechter, Business Registration Manager, Lien Processing Analysis, July 26, 2010 Q Matrix Consulting Group Page 198 Packet Pg.859 B.A.a CITY OF SAN BERNARDINO, CALIFORNIA Management Study of the Code Enforcement Division m 13. THE CODE ENFORCEMENT DIVISION AND THE OFFICE OF THE CITY 0 ATTORNEY SHOULD WORK TOGETHER TO STREAMLINE AND 0 STANDARDIZE THE PROCESS FOR REQUESTING A WARRANT. 0 T The Code Enforcement Division assigns three (3) Code Compliance Officers or w almost 13% of all of the Division's Code Compliance Officers to warrants. This includes m E m one (1) Code Compliance Officer to prepare warrant requests and two (2) Code A Compliance Officers to conduct field inspections regarding these warrants. 0 This is unreasonable. There is insufficient work involved in the preparation of warrants and the field o A inspection regarding warrants to justify the full-time assignment of three (3) Code N Compliance Officers. There were 172 warrants requested in 2010 (based upon data N from GOEnforce), and 155 in 2011 (based upon data from GOEnforce). Three (3) full- 0 time Code Compliance Officers are NOT needed to prepare an average of three (3) c E E warrant requests a week and to conduct field inspections regarding those warrants. m c However, the whole process and basis for providing 72-hour notices and 2 C 0 seeking warrants needs to be evaluated by the Code Enforcement Division and the Z Office of the City Attorney. E In some instances, the Code Enforcement Division is providing 72-hour notices 0 in situations where an urgency warrant would be more appropriate. The Division, for v 0 0 example, indicates, via its GOEnforce records, that it issued 72-hour violations as a U 0 c first step before the requesting warrants for hazardous / unsanitary premises (31 72- d hour notices), sewage (23 warrants), lack of hot and cold running water (104 72-hour 00 c m N notices), and vegetation / fire hazard (41 72-hour notices), open and vacant homes m (217 72-hour notices), among others. These instances appear to be situations in which E t U A Q Matrix Consulting Group Page 199 Packet Pg.660 '. CITY OF SAN BERNARDINO, CALIFORNIA Management Study of the Code Enforcement Division m the Division should immediately proceed to an urgency warrant, not a 72-hour violation 0 and a warrant. 0 0 T In other situations, the Division appears to be seeking warrants that may be cn unnecessary. The situation would be vacant lots that contain overgrown weeds, d E m grasses, shrubs, and trees that are visible from the public sidewalk or front yard, m including visible through chain link fences from the public sidewalk. California court 0 N cases have held that "a sidewalk, pathway, common entrance or similar passageway offers an implied permission to the public to enter which necessarily negates any `o A reasonable expectation of privacy in regard to observations made there." N The Code Enforcement Division and the Office of the City Attorney should work o6 N together to clarify those situations in which a warrant is necessary based upon v California case law. The City should assess the risks and benefits and legal v E implications in assessing which code enforcement mechanisms to utilize. In some c cases, administrative enforcement is appropriate for a particular type of violation based 2 C 0 upon the nature of the offense, type of remedy and potential for liability. 'c This clarification should be integrated in the development of a written procedure E developed by the Code Enforcement Division in consultation with the Office of the City i 0 Attorney regarding the specific situations in which a 72-hour notice will be required, an w d 0 0 urgency warrant will be requested, an administrative inspection warrant will be O 0 c requested, etc. c `m Recommendation #136: The Code Enforcement Division and the Office of the m City Attorney should work together to clarify those situations in which a 72-hour w notice and a warrant is necessary based upon California case law. m Recommendation #137: The clarification of those situations that will require a 72- c hour notice, an urgency warrant, an administrative inspection warrant, etc. E r U A Q Matrix Consulting Group Page 200 PacketPg{S61 CITY OF SAN BERNARDINO, CALIFORNIA Management Study of the Code Enforcement Division m should be integrated in the development of a written procedure developed by the 0 Code Enforcement Division, in consultation with the Office of the City Attorney, t regarding the specific situations in which a 72-hour notice will be given, an w urgency warrant will be requested, an administrative inspection warrant will be T requested, etc. w 14. THE AMOUNT OF AUTHORIZED STAFF WITHIN THE CODE ENFORCEMENT DIVISION SHOULD BE REDUCED TO MATCH WORKLOAD E d AND APPROPRIATE SERVICE LEVELS. R c m By a number of measures, the level of authorized staffing for the Code 0 N Enforcement Division exceeds that required given its workload and to provide an appropriate level of service i.e., proactive enforcement. These measures are presented N below. N • As noted in the comparative survey, the level of code enforcement staffing in A San Bernardino far exceeds that of the other seven (7) cities included in the ry comparative survey (see the table below). Moreno nSanta;] , San rn Pasadena Riverside onterto' Valle ' 'Pomona � AAi": ' ntana =Bernardino . a Managers 1 1 2 1 1 0 1 1 E Su ewisors 0 4 5 0 2 1 0 5 M officers 8 14 11 15 6 15 9 25 c Clerical 3 6 5 3 2 3 1 4 TOTAL 12 25 23 19 11 19 11 35 c 1,000 0 Population 1 12,631 12,162 7,589 9,914 14,880 18,829 17,305 5,851 T Position 13 c Important points to note regarding the level of authorized staffing for each of E these comparable cities and San Bernardino are presented below. ii w — San Bernardino has a higher level of staffing for code enforcement than w the other seven comparable cities in terms of the ratio of population per c code enforcement position. L) 0 c — The level of staffing within San Bernardino is a little more than twice the A average and the median of these seven other cities in terms of the ratio E of population per code enforcement position. m A — In fact, not one of these other seven cities has as high a proportion of code enforcement staffing as San Bernardino in terms of the ratio of M population per code enforcement position. E E L U A Q Matrix Consulting Group Page 201 Packet Pg.662 t CITY OF SAN BERNARDINO, CALIFORNIA Management Study of the Code Enforcement Division 0 • The total number of code enforcement cases opened by the Code Enforcement o Division in San Bernardino — per 1,000 population - is comparable to these 0 other seven (7) cities. The table below presents a comparison of the number of cases that were opened per 1,000 population in 2010-11 for Code Enforcement for these seven comparable cities and for San Bernardino. N Santa San Ana Fontana Bernardino E Code m m Enforcement � Cases 2,700 11,888 3,495 4,631 4,208 7,900 6,068 4,718 m Opened In 2010-11 0 Cases Per v' N 1,000 17.81 39.10 20.02 24.59 25.71 22.08 31.88 23.04 Population c Important points to note regarding the data contained within the table are presented below. s — The number of cases excludes multi-family and single-family rental inspections for all of the cities and for San Bernardino. T — The number of cases opened in 2010-11 in San Bernardino per 1,000 population were somewhat less, overall, than these seven (7) other cities. N The number of cases opened in San Bernardino per 1,000 population d was 11% less at the average and 6% less at the median than these other E seven cities. — The number of cases per 1,000 population in San Bernardino is fifth highest in comparison to these seven other cities. Riverside, Fontana, 2 Pomona, and Moreno Valley have a higher number of cases opened per c 1,000 population than San Bernardino. Santa Ana, Ontario, and Pasadena have a lower number of Cases opened per 1,000 population than San Bernardino. `o Overall, the number of cases opened in 2010-11 in San Bernardino is slightly w` less than the median of these seven other cities. 0 U • Other cities provide a higher level of service in terms of proactive enforcement. 0 However, as the table below indicates, some of the cities included in the comparative survey have developed extensive programs of proactive enforcement. m A N m m c m E t u n Q Matrix Consulting Group Page 202 Packet Pg. 863 B.A.a CITY OF SAN BERNARDINO, CALIFORNIA Management Study of the Code Enforcement Division v 0 O U Moreno ; Santa: • San '! y Pasadena Riverside Ontario vane'' Pomona Ana Fontana Bernardino Proportion Unknown 40°% 0% 3% 33% 40% 15% 19% `o I%)of code enforcement cases that rn are proactive c a E Important points to note regarding proactive code enforcement by these seven (7) cities and by San Bernardino are presented below. A — Pasadena did not know what proportion of their code enforcement cases were proactive versus reactive. g — Three (3) cities had higher levels of proactive code enforcement in terms of the proportion of their code enforcement cases that were proactive c versus reactive. This included Riverside, Pomona, and Santa Ana. In •2 these three (3) cities, proactive cases ranged from 33% to 40% of the total cases. Each of these cities had a higher workload per code enforcement officer than San Bernardino. N — Three (3) cities had low levels of proactive code enforcement including San Bernardino, Fontana, and Moreno Valley. In these three (3) cities, proactive cases ranged from 3% to 19% of the total cases. N d Overall, the proportion of proactive enforcement in San Bernardino represents a E lower proportion of the total caseload compared to Riverside, Pomona, and Santa Ana, but more than Ontario, Moreno Valley, and Fontana. c These are, however, comparative survey data, and not metrics. While the 2 .T comparative suggest that the level of staffing for the Code Enforcement Division v exceeds that warranted by workload and appropriate service levels, the Matrix E `o w Consulting Group developed a staffing assessment based upon the unique w d a characteristics of the service delivery within San Bernardino. That staffing assessment 0 0 c is presented below. `O m The staffing levels should be based upon the productivity metrics for the m Code Compliance Officers previously recommended in this report. The recommended productivity metrics are presented in the table below. m d E r U A Q Matrix Consulting Group Page 203 Packet Pg.864. CITY OF SAN BERNARDINO, CALIFORNIA Management Study of the Code Enforcement Division m a 0 Type of Productivity Metric Metric u m r Number of complaint-based or proactive code 50 active or open cases at any one time or a `o enforcement complaints assigned to a Code total of 600 cases per year per Code r v Compliance Officer Compliance Officer ,? u7 Single-Family Rental and Multi-Family Rental 12 to 15 rental inspections per day or 2,760 y Inspections to 3,450 inspections per year per Code E Compliance Officer rn m c m The productivity metric for active complaint-based or proactive cases per Code Compliance Officers presumes the active management of this caseload by Code Compliance Officers and the active monitoring and supervision of Code Compliance Officers by Code Compliance supervisors. c Code Compliance Officers should be generating 40% of their caseload through proactive case identification. In other words, 40% of the caseload for each Code Compliance Officer should be self-generated. N A full-time Code Compliance Officer will be required for the Crime Free N Rental Housing Program. This Cade Compliance Officer should not be expected on a routine basis to carry a caseload. • The Multi-Family Rental Inspection will continue with the present d ordinance and levels of service. There are approximately 864 multi-family E residential rental dwellings are inspected annually, exterior only by the Division. A • The Single-Family Rental Inspection will continue with the revised c ordinance and levels of service. For single-family rental inspections, a little 2 Mo more than 62% of the inspections of these types of cases found no violations. c There were approximately 7,421 single-family residential rental dwellings in the c City as of the middle of August 2011. This indicates that approximately 2,970 single-family rentals would be inspected yearly, and 4,452 single-family rentals would be inspected every three years or 1,484 annually. Overall, 4,454 single- a family rentals would be inspected annually. w` d • The Code Compliance supervisors should not routinely carry a case 0 workload. These staff should be dedicated to the supervision of Code g Compliance Officers. The ratio of first line supervisors to non-supervisors should be between 1 to 6 and 1 to 12 for the Division. c d m • The extent of support staff (i.e., Code Compliance Processing Assistants and Administrative Services Supervisors should approximate 18% to 20% of total staffing for the Division. This is based upon the results found in the M comparative survey. c d E r U N Q Matrix Consulting Group Page 204 Packet Pg.865 ; k` CITY OF SAN BERNARDINO, CALIFORNIA Management Study of the Code Enforcement Division m Allowances must be made for vacation and sick leave, and training of staff. The staff of the Division will not be available each workday given the likelihood of sick and vacation leave, and the necessity of training of these staff. 0 T Allowances must be made for the weed abatement program, and field enforcement / monitoring of conditions of approval for conditional use in permits and CEQA mitigation measures. The weed abatement program does d not capture its data within GOEnforce, and has only recently begun to account a for a wider range of its workload. Nonetheless, the weed abatement program A workload and its staffing impact must be considered, and the impacts of field enforcement / monitoring of conditions of approval for conditional use permits and CEQA mitigation measures must be considered as well. N Altogether, this analysis of workload and service levels indicates that the Code C 0 Enforcement Division requires fifteen (15) Code Compliance Officers, three (3) Code d Compliance Supervisors, one (1) Code Enforcement Division Manager, and three (3) N C6 Code Compliance Processing Assistants. This amounts to a total of twenty-two (22) N n positions for the Division versus its current complement of thirty-five (35) positions. rn (The Matrix Consulting Group previously recommended the elimination of a Code E E m Compliance Supervisor position in recommendation #8.) @ In terms of workload per Code Compliance Officer, the City of San Bernardino 0 A will still have lesser workload per Officer than four (4) of the other seven (7) cities c included in the comparative survey and comparable workload for two (2) other cities E d 0 (but more than one other). c W The City should make this staffing adjustment through attrition. o U The cost impact of this recommendation is presented in the table below. __ 'v d m c @ U) m m d E z U Q Matrix Consulting Group Page 205 PacketPg.866 '. CITY OF SAN BERNARDINO, CALIFORNIA Management Study of the Code Enforcement Division d 0 0 Recommendation Annual Cost Savin s 0 Eliminate ten 10 Code Compliance Officer positions through attrition $824,750 Eliminate a Code Compliance Processing Assistant position through attrition $50,100 0 Eliminate a Code Compliance Su eNisor position through attrition $111,250 T v TOTAL ANNUAL COST SAVINGS $986,100 3 N Recommendation #138: The City should allocate fifteen (15) Code Compliance E Officers, three (3) Code Compliance Supervisors, one (1) Code Enforcement Division Manager, and three (3) Code Compliance Processing Assistants to the Code Enforcement Division. 0 Recommendation #139: The City should reduce the extent of authorized staffing in the Code Enforcement Division, through attrition, by ten (10) Code Compliance Officer positions, one (1) Code Compliance Processing Assistant position, and c one (1) Code Compliance Supervisor position. 4 A a N Cl N T 'O N c v E a m m c m c 0 N O c v E d 0 0 w c W m 0 O v 0 c 9 A G d m C A N m C d E L U A Q Matrix Consulting Group Page 206 Packet Pg.867