HomeMy WebLinkAbout1990/01/24 - Agenda Packet - Adj
~~~cn.>7gHc
~' j ~
S -. >
r
~_
:J~~ U I >
1977
crrv of
RAT'JTC}`10 %C~U(G~\I7vI~OyN~G~AT
C~/l~1 1~ 7\~A/111~A~1L
I-L.T~~ lt1
Ad iourned Meet my
January 24, 1990
Rancho Cucamonga Neighborhood Center
(Muscat Aoom)
9791 Arrow Route
Rancho Cucamonga, California
6:30 n.m.
A. CALL TO ORDER
1. Pledge of Allegiance
2. Roll Call:
Buquet _, Alcza ntler stout Brown _, Wright _
E. STEMS OF DISCUSSION
1. Discussion of sherif f'e Depaxtment Employee Rotation Policies.
2. Diecuesion of Degree of Discretion Given by the Sheriff's Department to
the Station Commander and Command Sta Ef to Imp: ement Local Law Enforcement
Programs and Interface ae a Police Chiet in Responding to Local Needs.
3. Discuss ion of Sher lLL'e Department Philosopny for a City Input Process for
Selection of Adm in iet rative Personnel for the Local Subetat ion.
4. Discussion of Sher iff'e Department Po liciee with Regard to Public Relations
Training Currently and/or Planned to Enhance and Reinforce the poe it ive
Profess Tonal Smage of Local Law Enfocc ement Personnel,
5. Discussion of shez if f'e Department Hecept rv icy i'owazd the Cane iuerai i~u
of Lccal Law Enforcement Ideas and Program.
6. Diecuesion o£ Cu rzent Contract - Doe9 the Cu rcent Form of the Contract Meet
the Needs of the City Today?
7. Discussion of Ie eu ea of Mutual Concern.
' City Council Agenda -2- January 24, 1990
,:
0. COMIIONIGTIONS IRON T66 ?VBLIC
Thi• ie the tine avd place for the general public to address the Citp Couveil.
Stste Lay prohibits the Citp Council from addreui¢g evy issue not previously
included ov the Agenda. The City Couvcil say receive tutlsony a¢d set the
flatter fora subsequent ~wting. Cooeots ere to be liiited to five sinute• par
ivdividual.
O. ADJOUNNMRNT
NEETINO TO ADJOURN Td JANUARY 29, 1990, 7:00 P.M. y0R Tag II7VIRONMENTAL
NANAGEMQ7T COf.OlI93ION MEETING, TO BE BQ.D AT LIONS PART[ COMMUNITY CENTEA, 9161
BASE LIMB ROAD, RANCRO NCAMONOA.
I, Debra J. Adage, City Clerk of Lha Citp of Rencbo Cucarovge, bezeby certify
that • true, accurate copy of the foregoing agenda vas Meted ov Javuary 19,
1990, sevevty-two Douce prior to the aaetivg par Oovervscvt Code 54953 at 9320-
C Baae Line Road.
ITSMB OF DIBCII8820N
Meeting with Under=_heriff
January 24, 1990
1. Discussion of eheriff'a Department Smplovee Rotation
Policies
We have discussed previously how the City perceives the
rotation policies to affect the level of service through
loss of continuity, experience and stability.
A. Explain specifically how the existing assignment
system actually works:
1. How are line deputies selected for assignment?
What mix between people on their first field
assignment (fresh from jail/Deputy I status)
versus more senior deputies?
2. Are there any minimum/maximum tenures for
duties/assignments?
e. Will the City be allowed to provide input into the
rotation policies so that the City can have greater
levels of stability and continuity with respect to
line personnel. How can we accomplish this?
2.
1. Does he have veto power/any control over people
assigned to the station? .',ny active involve-
ment in the selection process to the extent one
exists?
2. Conversely, any control over people transferred
out, including:
a. Poor performers who should/need to be
moved elsewhere.
A. What control over people assigned to/transferred out
of/from the Rancho Cucamonga substation? More
specifically:
ITENB OP DZHCD88ION
NHHTZNO KITH DNDERHHERIFF
January 24, 1990
Page 2
b. Good people who he/the community may want
to keep.
e. What discretionary authority in discipline situa-
tions involving Rancho Cucamonga based personnel?
C. Does he have the authority to recommend policing
programs/make program decisions without approval
of San Bernardino based personnel? This ranges
from:
1. Recommending specific programs -- i.e. specific
crime prevention approaches; school programs;
etc.
2. Field tactical decisions such as best
structure
3.
A. What is the current method of assigning new station
~._
oo-......-d/a..-_: _c..rc..~.c c"....
1. Does Captain have any influence over assign-
ments in the selection process?
If not, why not? If so, does this discretion
extend to consultation with the City Manager's
Office?
2. Does the Captain have any influence or say in
developing performance criteria of local
administrative personnel?
B. Conversely, can City have any input in selection of
or~•r.... ...a.,~ ..,a ..~
----- -.-....-..•...~_ ..••.. .np,.., o.; perforw~arce expecta-
tions?
What is the best vehicle to accomplishing this?
ITEMB OF DI8CDB8ION
MSSTIRO MITB DNDERBIiSRIFF
January 24, 1990
Page 3
How are newly assigned personnel prepared for an
assignment?
1. What ^;*_ial brief irg/traini :g specif.cally
geared to assignment in the City is provided?
If they accomplish the above, what is the con-
tent and how are specific performance expec-
tations communicated to new staff? What are
these? What steps have been taken to provide
the City an opportunity to have input to
formulating specific areas of performance
expectation.
B. Under existing approaches, can the City Manager's
Office be informed of all complaints received
related to Sheriff's service and/or staff conduct
in Rancho Cucamonga as well as results and steps
taken to follow up and resolve these complaints.
This includes citizen complaints made directly to
the Sheriff's Department as well as those channeled
to or through the City Manager's Office.
Disaussioh o[ aheriLL'a Daosrtmeat Raaaotivit•• Toward
the consideration o[ Loasl Lev BRioresmaat Ideas and
~roarnm
71. To the extent that Station Commander is given
discretion, how will San Bernardino County staff
attiCmdira lly react to the Station Commander's deci-
sion and/or recommendations about local issues
or ideas?
What organizational culture is fostered to
facilitate the Commander's discretion? In
other words, will the Commander be allowed
tv exEYCiSe ills initiative and have the
freedom to interact with "downtown" command
staff and have it received objectively without
derision!
ITE!!8 OF DI8CO88IOH
MBBTIHO KITH DHDHHBHERIPP
January 24, 1990
Page 4
6. Discussion of Currsat Coakract -- Doss tEe C. ~ Fora
of tEe Contract Heet tEe Haada of tEe City Today7
a. The current contract is in essentially the same
form as it was when the City first began contract-
ing for law enforcement services. Will the County
Sheriff's Department be receptive to:
.. IIpdatirg the contract to make it less siceietal
and more reflective of local needs?
2. Clarifying provisions of costing, service
levels, et cetera, essentially,
3. Putting into place language reflecting the
disposition of the above policy/operational
and related issues?
B. How do you propose we best accomplish t:,i s?
7. Discussion of Issues of Mutnal Concern