The URL can be used to link to this page

Home My WebLink AboutCSD-13-092 - By-law Enforcement Overview and Service Level ReviewStaff Report I r Community Services Department wvwuukitchenerra REPORT TO: Mayor Zehr and Members of Council DATE OF MEETING: August 26, 2013 SUBMITTED BY: Michael May, Deputy CAO, Community Services (519- 741 -2200, ext. 7079) PREPARED BY: Shayne Turner, Director of By -law Enforcement, (519 -741- 2200, ext. 7753) WARD(S) INVOLVED: All DATE OF REPORT: August 21, 2013 REPORT NO.: CSD -13 -092 SUBJECT: BY -LAW ENFORCEMENT OVERVIEW AND SERVICE LEVEL REVIEW RECOMMENDATION: For Information BACKGROUND: The City's By -law Enforcement Division has been in place since January of 2002. The Division was originally created as a new Division in the Corporate Services Department by combining staff from the Building and Traffic Divisions. Over the past 11 years, the Division has experienced significant growth in terms of calls for service, as well as the number of services and initiatives they provide. Conversely, there has been little growth in terms of staff resources, resulting in challenges in meeting public expectations. REPORT: Staff will be making a presentation at the August 26th Strategic Session with Council. A copy of the presentation is provided with this report. The presentation will provide an overview of the services provided by the By -law Enforcement Division, certain trends that have been observed over time and a focus on some of the related challenges experienced. The presentation will also touch briefly on thoughts moving forward to respond to these challenges, as well as increased public education with respect to By -law Enforcement services and processes. ALIGNMENT WITH CITY OF KITCHENER STRATEGIC PLAN: This request supports the Community Priority of Quality of Life and the foundation of Effective and Efficient Government, as contained in the City's Strategic Plan. 4 a. -I FINANCIAL IMPLICATIONS: Any potential financial implications resulting from this report and presentation will be referred to the 2014 budget process. COMMUNITY ENGAGEMENT: N/A ACKNOWLEDGED BY: Michael May, Deputy CAO, Community Services Department 4a. -2 By -law Enforcement Division Overview of Services and Service Level Review i w 4a. -3 i w To engage City Council in a discussion regarding the: • Focus /mandate of by -law enforcement. • Adequacy of current by -law enforcement service levels. • Desire to see service levels /response times maintained or improved. 4a. -4 i w • Background/ Situational Analysis • Council Input • Service Requests • Response Protocols /Times Going Forward Questions /Discussion 4a. -5 i w BACKGROUND/ SITUATIONAL ANALYSIS • Divisional Structure • Types of Service Requests • Response Protocol • Public Awareness • Trends • Challenges • G rowth • New Programs 4a. -6 ■ ■ ■ • 1 Director, 2 Supervisors • 4 Administrative /Customer Service staff • 20 full -time officers • 8 part -time and temp status officers • 6 work units within the Division — Property Standards — Parking — Noise — Signs — Parks /Trails — Administration (customer service) i w 4a. -7 i ir. A. 4gwM • Annual communications plan — Anticipate seasonal issues such as winter parking and open air fires — Brouchures (Your City Rules) • Utilize a number of venues to raise awareness • Acknowledge more can be done 4a. -8 0 0 orr)orate Contact Center Transitioned to the CCC in 2009 Service Requests compared to call volume W 1=1 I WO Me 5000 N Lamm== r4mWaMill"Affm 2009-2012 —Service Requests J, I 4a. -9 i w • Increase in frequency & complexity of neighbour disputes. • Large variance in what the public thinks we can do (plenty of authority vs. limited /no authority). • People are more aware of by -laws and legal options. • Shift in public expectations especially with the CCC (e.g. expect immediate response after hours). • Social media — increase in public awareness and ability to make a public complaints (impacts frequency of complaints). • Increasing reliance on gov't to address all issues with regulations. 4 a. - 10 i w • No consistent measurement standards. • No standards for minimum qualifications, training, uniforms, equipment, policies. • Chronic deficit — parking fines, part -time wages. • Gaps in schedule -not 24/7 (see next slide) • Officer safety (only sending one officer to a call) • Increase in service demands. 4 a. - 11 d uty. 23:00 22:00 21:00 20:00 19:00 18:00 17:00 16:00 15:00 14:00 13:00 12:00 11:00 10:00 09:00 08:00 07:00 06:00 05:00 04:00 03:00 02:00 01:00 00:00 After hours coveraae indicates when there is no officer on SUNDAY NOISE MON -FRI NOISE SATURDAY NOISE i w �IJ J, ¶,rir,44Vµ��M , ^I��I��IW, 4 a. - 12 dded Services /Initiatives i w • Licensing inspections • Fireworks • Permanent sign • Snow events permits /complaints • School Zone Safety* • Swimming pool • Leaf collection enclosures Encroachments • Lower Doon student • Snow dumping housing* • Open Air Burning By -law* • Site Alterations and Tree Cutting By -laws • Public Nuisance By -law • • Nuisance cat provisions Vacant Buildings By -law • Marijuana grow • Towing vehicles from operations streets and private 0 Emergency call out property process • Graffiti By -law 4 a. - 13 COUNCIL INPUT • City Councillor Feedback • Input from Council office staff i w 4 a. - 14 itv Councillor InDUt By -law Enforcement's role — Enforcement is primary role; — Mediation skills are important; — Educate where possible i w 4 a. - 15 Councillor In i u t �jII�� WW I ¶I �IjI �,IJ C��. ��i' W" II P ,i,g 4Vµ��M ,, Division's ability to meet customer service expectations — Overall, doing a good job. — Resourcing an issue — after hours, response times, complaint volume. — Better education on property standards process (perceived inaction). 4 a. - 16 ■ ■ Specific concerns from public —Lack of understanding of certain enforcement processes; — Response times; — Follow -ups on open complaints i w 4 a. - 17 ■ ■ • Areas of most concern re: public expectations: i w — Response times — need to be improved and help public understand the process — Education and public awareness initiatives — Optimize resources, opportunity for efficiencies via technology and staff structure 4 a. - 18 SERVICE REQUESTS • Parking • Parks& School Zones • Noise • Property Standards • Sign Enforcement i w 4 a. - 19 i ■ i n t.q • 300 %increase over 11 years 4a. -20 ■ SUM�MARY 1 • i w Fluctuates but not representative of increase in complaints received 4a. -21 ■ SUMMARY OF PRIVATELY ISSUED TICKETS 2002 -2012 24000 22590 22000 - 20000 18000 16000 14000 12000 19860 20049 20418 18355 17975 18963 13880 12266 12061 14788 10000 .. p ........................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................... ............................... 2002 2003 2004 2005 2006 2007 2008 2009 2010 2011 2012 i w TOTALS • Decrease in tickets issued corresponds with increase in fines for 2009 and beginning of current deficit position 4 a. - 22 7000 ./// 5000 Mc 3000 2000 1000 I$] 3 Hour Enforcement 2007 2008 2009 2010 2011 2012 i w , ^I��I��IW, #CHALKINGS #TICKETS • # of vehicles chalked is significantly more than those in violation 4 a. - 23 ■ Additional factors that influence i w demands on officer time — Towing —city streets, private property and snow events — Trials —trial requests remain consistent at 1.6% of all tickets issued but time spent at court is not entirely controllable 4a. -24 750 700 650 600 550 500 450 400 350 300 i s and School Zone Enforcernen � 4gw,M ,. TRAIL BIKE /PARKS INCIDENTS 2008 -2012 2008 2009 2010 2011 2012 General incidents /complaints — 75% increase over 5 years TOTAL 4 a. - 25 i s and School Zone Enforcemen 4gwMIf . F/T SCHOOL ZONE OFFICERS ANNUAL TICKET TOTALS 2008 -2012 9815 984$ 8918 771 7438 - TOTALS 6000 2008 2009 2010 2011 2,012 • Increase in general incidents corresponds to decrease in total parking tickets 4 a. - 26 i s and School Zone Enforcernen � 4gw,M f • Suggests that awareness is resulting in greater compliance 4 a. - 27 ■ NOISE OFFICERS TOTAL CALLS SERVICE i w • Calls for service 220% increase over 10 years • Added 3 shifts per week for peak times and schedule gaps 4a. -28 ■ 0 • 1 � 3 13 , �.16 21 22, TOTALS ,00 2012 • Calls received when there is no officer on duty • Essentially no response or very late response i w 4a. -29 I ir Rijrninn I EN AIR BURNING COMPLAINTS II �^�QfiIY e✓JNtlHq'pl 2 22' TOTALS a, • Funding added in 2013 to offset part -time wages for prioritzed enforcement ($29,000) 4a. -30 • Growth in complaints • 2002 — 2,506 • 2012 -4,518 • 80% T over 10 years (complaints) • .5 FTE T over 10 years (staff complement) i w 4a. -31 ■ i w • Officer monitors /inspects permits which are issued by Planning Division, as well as all sign complaints • 2002 — 2,032 permits (portables) • 2012 — 2,806 permits (portables) plus 185 permanent signs • Complaints — 2009 —366 — 2010 — 754 (election year) — 2011 —377 — 2012-467 4a. -32 RESPONSE PROTOCOLS /TIMES Reactive Proactive Immediate Response Monitored Response Case management approach i w 4 a. - 33 i w • Parking: immediate and monitored • The nature of the complaint determines whether: —we respond immediately; — Hold over to the next shift; — Monitor the next day; 4a. -34 i w • Noise (including other by -law concerns): Immediate • Response times are subject to variables, including the time of day and day of the week • Peak times are late evenings and weekends • Range from 10 minutes to 3 hours. 4a. -35 i w • Property Standards: — Case management • Goal is to make initial contact within 1 business day • Response typically involves the scheduling of an inspection • File is managed over a period of time • Compliance times vary — dependent upon response from violators 4 a. - 36 GOING FORWARD i w 4 a. - 37 • Over the past 11 years.... — Increase in calls for service (complaints) — Increase in services /initiatives provided — Public expectations have increased (expecting more immediate responses — Challenged to meet expectations on response times — Gaps in coverage is a public concern — Public education initiatives have increased but we are aware more can be done — Analysis shows we are at capacity in some areas of enforcement and are significantly challenged in other areas i w 4a. -38 I i w T7 11 • In an effort to address the increased service demands on By -Law Enforcement, staff are already exploring the following Ideas/programs- - Finalize Divisional mandate — Administrative Monetary Penalties (parking enforcement) — Increased use of technology — Increase public education — Promote use of mediation service 4a. -39 stions /Discussion i w 1. What role does City Council believe the By -law Enforcement Division should play within the community? 2. What specific by -law enforcement challenges do you believe we should be addressing more effectively? 4a. -40