Police Services Analysis – Phase 2 Draft Report Kensington Police Protection and Community Services District, California

Phase 2 Goals With community input, develop service delivery assumptions for a potential law enforcement contract partner. Based on these assumptions, identify potential contract partners. Identify potential annual operating costs associated with a Kensington law enforcement services contract – to include full- service and hybrid service delivery models. Determine Kensington’s next steps with respect to possible contracting.

Phase 2 Scope of Work Engage the community in public meetings held on: March 17 April 28 May 24 Use of an online survey to help determine service delivery expectations about police services. Contact potential law enforcement contract for service partners to gain their insights and feedback. Develop an analysis of contract for service operational costs and compare to in-house Kensington operational costs. Development of the Phase 2 Report.

Key Phase 1 Operational Recommendations The District needs 2 sworn staff on duty at all times – with one being a supervisor. This requires: A Chief, 4 sergeants and a corporal (who can also function as a supervisor). 4 police officers. Improve training, providing 40-hours per year per sworn staff. Adopt best-practice approaches to equipping officers, including body-worn cameras. Improve administrative support for police services – a full time civilian administrative assistant / technician. Increase salaries to be competitive in the marketplace.

Public Input Helped Frame Our Analysis for Phase 2 Results from the Town Halls, online questionnaire and direct input guided our Phase 2 analysis of potential contract for service police operations. This resulted in the following expectations: Kensington would be a dedicated patrol beat around the clock. The beat would always be staffed by sworn officers. A potential contractor should be in an adjacent community to facilitate service expectations. A contractor would consider Kensington’s unique needs in a formal community-oriented policing approach. A contractor would be willing to be flexible in police services provision such as delivering hybrid approaches (e.g., Kensington staffs patrol in the day, the contractor staffs patrol at Night). A contractor would be willing to provide dedicated management to oversee Kensington’s police operations.

Outcomes of Potential Contractor Contacts We reached out to three potential contract partners: Berkeley Albany El Cerrito Feedback ranged from no interest to mild interest from these neighboring communities. These attitudes could, of course, change moving forward. Based on the feedback received, El Cerrito initially appears to be the most viable contract for service partner. As a result, a sample full service contract model was built based on information from El Cerrito.

Full Service Contract Delivery A dedicated Kensington sworn operation would require the following: A manager dedicated to Kensington (contract Lieutenant or Captain). 1.5 field sergeants providing Kensington beat supervision 24/7. 5 officers assigned to cover the Kensington beat around the clock A half-time (0.5) detective. One civilian “police services assistant”. This is a total of nine (9) positions – 8 sworn and 1 civilian – compared to the Phase 1 recommended in-house staffing of 11 positions (10 sworn and 1 civilian).

Comparison of 2018 Costs

Cost Impacts Compared to Current In-house Services Both the recommended in-house plan and a potential full services contract are more expensive than current police operations. The recommended In-house police approach cost impacts: Additional staff resources and higher job classifications (e.g., Sgt.). Recommended higher salaries. Related operational cost increases. Potential full services contract cost impacts: Fewer staff but higher overall compensation. Continued payment of retirees’ post employment benefits. Continued payment of higher Unfunded Accrued Liability for CalPERS due to Kensington’s “Inactive” status. Administrative overhead charges.

Key Outcomes of the Project Kensington has a police service that has significant issues that need to be addressed, many of which require additional staff to address. However, risks remain even if these investments are made. There may be modest cost savings of a full service contract compared to the recommended In-house approach. While the financial comparisons are not clear between a recommended in house and a full service contract, there are many other advantages in contracting: Guaranteed coverage Improved management Transferring responsibility for service and financial risk A hybrid contract model may also be a solution for Kensington.

Next Steps There are many analytical assumptions and uncertainties in the analysis of a potential contract for full service. Hybrid approaches should be explored even if full service contracting is not desired or results from an RFP process. As a result, Kensington should: Test the market with a Contract for Service Request for Proposal. Include a scope of service that requests a full-service law enforcement approach and price and options / price for delivering one or more hybrid law enforcement solutions.

Questions and Discussion ?