Docstoc

Minutes of the Regular Meeting of the Mayor and Council of the

Document Sample
Minutes of the Regular Meeting of the Mayor and Council of the Powered By Docstoc
					Minutes   of the Regular Meeting of the Mayor and Council of the
City of   South Tucson, Arizona, held Monday, April 21, 2008, 6:00
P.M. at   the City of South Tucson Council Chambers, 1601 South 6th
Avenue,   South Tucson, Arizona

Council Present:      Jennifer Eckstrom
                      Pete Tadeo
                      John Garcia
                      Paul Diaz
                      Idelfonso Green
                      Miguel Rojas

Staff Present:        Enrique Serna, City Manager
                      Ruben Villa, Finance Director
                      Dolores Robles, City Clerk
                      Angel Lopez, Public Works Director
                      Sharon Hayes, Police Chief
                      Marilyn Chico, Housing Director
                      Ron Wilson, Judge
                      Larry Anderson, Fire Chief
                      Patrick Moran, City Attorney

Guests:               Roger Forrester, Mature Worker Connection
                      Carl Lopez, Mature Worker Connection



Mayor Eckstrom led the Pledge of Allegiance.      Councilman Garcia
led the Invocation.


ITEM #04 - ROLL CALL - All members of the Council were present,
except for Councilwoman Soltero who was excused.


ITEM #05 - APPROVAL OF MINUTES: REGULAR MEETING APRIL 14, 2008 -
Motion by Councilman Garcia to approve the minutes of the Regular
Meeting of April 14, 2008. Seconded by Councilman Rojas. Motion
passed unanimously.


ITEM #06 - PRESENTATION BY MATURE WORKER CONNECTION - Mr. Roger
Forrester, Program Administrator, and Mr. Carl Lopez, Project
Administrator of the Mature Worker Connection addressed Mayor and
Council. Their intent at the meeting was to clarify the program,
answer questions and solicit support from the Council. The Mature
Worker Connection is a non-profit, free job placement service
which assists people fifty and older and employers in Pima County.
The program is responsible for connecting mature job seekers with
employers, and provides training and career development assistance
for job seekers. Mature Worker Connection has been in operation
for two years and is located in South Tucson at the Sam Lena
Library.   Mature Worker Connection's key partner is the Pima
County One-Stop Career Centers.    Community leaders stand behind
Minutes of Regular Meeting
April 21, 2008
Page 2

the project and local employers register with the Mature Worker
Connection. Recruiting is done from within the community to fill
job vacancies. Persons in the community will participate in the
steering committee, and others will act as overseers for the
program. Mature Worker Connection will meet with a community team
who will assist in contacting more than one hundred employers in
South Tucson and ask for their participation in the program. The
agency is also working to break down the stereotype of older
workers (sickly, unreliable, etc.). Mr. Lopez and Mr. Forrester
explained reports show older workers to be devoted to their jobs
and dependable. The agency will prepare a detailed South Tucson
initiative proposal to include a Statement of Need, project
description,   including   objectives,  methods,    staffing   and
administration, evaluation and sustainability.     Mature Workers
Connection will keep the Mayor and Council posted as the program
progresses. Councilman Garcia requested more brochures and cards
to keep in the Council offices for distribution.        Councilman
Garcia asked if the Mature Worker Connection works with the
Jackson Center, to which Mr. Lopez replied the agencies do work
together. Mr. Forrester thanked Mr. Serna for his assistance and
support.


ITEM #07 - RESOLUTION NO. 08-16 OF THE MAYOR AND COUNCIL OF THE
CITY OF SOUTH TUCSON, ARIZONA, ON BEHALF OF THE MUNICIPAL COURT
AUTHORIZING AND APPROVING THE WORK ORDER PURSUANT TO RFQ06-05
CONTRACT BETWEEN THE CITY OF SOUTH TUCSON MUNICIPAL COURT AND
ALLIANCE ONE RECEIVABLES MANAGEMENT, INC. FOR PRIMARY AND
PROGRESSIVE DEBT COLLECTION SERVICES AND AUTHORIZING THE MAYOR
AND/OR CITY MANAGER TO EXECUTE THE WORK ORDER AND DECLARING AN
EMERGENCY TO EXIST - Mr. Serna stated Judge Wilson has attempted
different remedies to address the backlog of delinquent accounts
in the Court.   This resolution would approving a work order per
the existing contract between the City and the Arizona Supreme
Court, Administrative Office of the Courts for collection
services.   The collection services contractor is Alliance One
Receivables Management, Inc.   Motion by Councilman Diaz to pass
and adopt Resolution No. 08-16 approving the work order pursuant
to RFQ06-05 between the South Tucson Municipal Court and Alliance
One Receivables Management, Inc. for primary and progressive debt
collection services and authorizing the Mayor and/or City Manager
to execute the work order and declaring an emergency to exist.
Seconded by Councilman Green. Motion passed unanimously.


ITEM #09 - A RESOLUTION OF THE MAYOR AND COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF
SOUTH TUCSON, ARIZONA, APPROVING THE INTERGOVERNMENTAL AGREEMENT
FOR PAYMENT FOR THE INCARCERATION OF MUNICIPAL PRISONERS BETWEEN
THE CITY OF SOUTH TUCSON, ARIZONA AND PIMA COUNTY, AUTHORIZING
EXECUTION OF THIS RESOLUTION AND AUTHORIZING THE MAYOR OF THE CITY
Minutes of Regular Meeting
April 21, 2008
Page 3

OF SOUTH TUCSON TO EXECUTE SAID IGA AND DECLARING AN EMERGENCY TO
EXIST - Mr. Serna stated this resolution reaffirms and establishes
the contractual arrangement with Pima County for the incarceration
of prisoners.    Motion by Councilman Rojas to pass and adopt
Resolution No. 08-18 approving the Intergovernmental Agreement for
payment for the incarceration of municipal prisoners between the
City and Pima County, authorizing execution of this resolution and
authorizing the Mayor to execute said IGA and declaring an
emergency to exist. Seconded by Councilman Diaz. The following is
the transcript of the discussion of Item #09:

Councilman Green: I have a question. I guess this could either
go for you or for the judge. Once the individual gets picked up,
sent to jail, comes to court, we're looking at $176.25, you know,
per day, right? Or for the first day, and then it drops down to
what, $68.79? These guys, are they paying restitution back to the
City? Or are they being given, you know, time served?

Judge Wilson:   Madam Mayor, members of the Council, Councilman
Green, in regards to the jail cost, the reimbursement of jail
costs to the City, currently, the only defendants who are paying
the City back are the defendants who have actually been sentenced
to serve jail time by the court, or have entered into a plea
agreement with the prosecutor. Those defendants who are currently
being picked up by the police department, brought to the jail and
then are held on bond, are still presumed innocent.     And so in
regards to the Court recovering the cost of that time that they
spent in jail, we have not assessed that to the defendant. The
prosecutor might be able to elaborate more in regards to the
legality of us, if we wanted to impose that cost onto the
defendant, but right now the only people who, or the only
defendants who actually pay the City back are those individuals
who we sentenced to serve time in jail.

Councilman Green: Okay. I guess my other question would be can
we; the ones that weren't sentenced by you but picked up for
whatever infraction and placed there?

Judge Wilson:  That's an excellent question.   I would have to
defer that to the prosecutor.  I don't know the answer to that
question.

Mr. Moran: Madam Mayor, Councilman Green, as far as that issue,
it's been broached that statute that authorizes the reimbursement
of jail costs is a little ambiguous as to that point. Whether or
not, it essentially basically says, and I don't have the statute
in front of me right now to read it word for word, but essentially
what it says it that a City may recoup the costs of incarceration
costs. Now from my familiarity with other courts, typically the
only time jail fees are actually imposed are in the situations
Minutes of Regular Meeting
April 21, 2008
Page 4

that the judge just spoke about, was where the court actually, it
institutes a sentence whether by plea agreement or by the Judge's
ruling on a trial or something like that.         That's the only
situations where they actually do that because it's clear that
that's authorized by the statute. What is not clear is whether or
not the judge can make the order to recoup the jail cost for
somebody who was picked up and booked into jail by the police
department. There are a couple of secondary issues as well. As
the Council may know that obviously a lot of people that end up
getting booked into jail and that sort of thing are indigent and
recouping that cost, even if ordered by the court, may not happen
(inaudible). And then there's other issues as well that are even
broader than that as far as trying to limit the costs in
situations where people are booked into jail and that sort of
thing. And it's not an issue that has not been brought up. The
City Manager and the Judge and I, along with other departments,
have been in discussions and it's an issue that every jurisdiction
is dealing with, especially in this time of tighter budgets.
Because the jail costs are pretty substantial. But yet then we're
weighing that on the other side where there is a need, obviously,
for jurisdictions to be able to utilize the jail in certain
situations.    And it's something that we are all, you know,
battling with and attempting to come up with solutions that will
limit the cost, not only to the City, but also, we also have to
keep in mind that we're attempting to have justice as well. So I
mean we don't want to not put somebody in jail just because we're
worried about the cost. But on the other hand, we shouldn't have
people that are sitting in jail on things that they shouldn't be
in jail on.   So it's something that we are indeed aware of and
it's something that we're mindful of in the administration of the
court. And we're attempting to come up with better solutions so
that the costs do not overrun.
Councilman Green:   In comparison to the number, and you may not
have the number, but in comparison to the number of people that
are ordered by you to, are sentenced to jail, in comparison to
those who are being picked up by the police, is it more the one-
nighters, two-nighters in jail than the ones you sentence?

Judge Wilson:   Madam Mayor, members of the Council, I would say
ninety-five, off the top of my head, about ninety to ninety-five
percent of the jail costs, at this point, are costs incurred by
defendants pre-sentence.    These are individuals who are being
incarcerated, who are being brought to the jail, that are spending
the night, they're spending two nights, and they're not being
sentenced to jail, or it's not part of a plea offer. Most of the
defendants who are sentenced by me are, who are, who are sentenced
as part of a plea offer are those defendants who have committed
the DUI, the DUI extremes, or they have committed other types of
crimes where the legislature has had to mandate that they serve
Minutes of Regular Meeting
April 21, 2008
Page 5

time in jail.   A significant, the majority of the other crimes
that come before us, that a person either accepts a plea or a
sentence involves probation, a fine in a zone where we tell the
person, you know, it's pretty much to stay out of Dodge type of,
you know, you committed this crime here. We don't want to see you
back for the next three years. But most people, because it is a
limited jurisdiction court, are not sentenced to jail unless it's
mandated by the legislature or it's a crime where the defendant is
a repeat offender and, you know, the jail time is appropriate
because of the severity of the offense, or because of the
repetitiveness. But that being said, as Mr. Moran had stated, we
are looking currently at options to incarceration.      That will
allow us to significantly reduce, hopefully, the jail cost. One
of those options is Pre-Trial Services.      Currently, Pre-Trial
Services does not provide any services to the South Tucson City
Court. But what they do is they do an initial screening for all
of the defendants who are incarcerated, or who are arrested and
booked and brought to the jail.    In that initial screening, the
Pre-Trial Service counselor will then determine whether or not a
person should be held or whether or not the person should be
released.   If the individual is held, then they are held on a
bond, of course. If they are released, then they're given a new
court date. They may be third party released to a family member,
to a friend, to a provider, if they're involved in CPSA or they're
Rule 11 or Title 36. And we believe, we don't have the, all of
the information and the costs at hand at this point, but we
believe and we hope that some type of relationship with Pre-Trial
Services would significantly reduce the number of people who are
spending time in jail, as Mr. Moran had stated, shouldn't be in
jail for whatever reasons.    And so that's something that we're
currently exploring.   And Pre-Trial Services also will stay in
contact with the defendant so that when they are released; they
ensure that the defendant, to the best of their ability, will show
up at their Pre-Trial date. 'Cause one of the problems that we
have is that when defendants are released, they don't show up for
their arraignment or their pre-trial.    A warrant is issued for
their arrest. And then they're arrested again. So they're being
arrested twice, sometimes two or three times, for the same charge
'cause they failed to appear. Pre-Trial Services will intervene
and will make sure that the defendant, to the best of their
ability, make sure that the defendant complies with the conditions
of release which would again reduce significantly the number of
defendants who are arrested repetitively for the same offense
because they fail to appear. We also believe that a significant
portion of those defendants may have behavioral health issues and
mental health issues.    So by bringing in CPSA and some of the
other providers, and notifying them that this individual is either
in our custody or has had contact with our court, again, we'll be
able to hopefully, we're anticipating, reduce those jail costs
significantly. So those are a few of the things that Mr. Serna
Minutes of Regular Meeting
April 21, 2008
Page 6

was alluding to when he had mentioned some of the things that the
court is trying to do. Me and Mr. Moran actually were having this
discussion right before the Council meeting started at 6 o'clock
today.

Councilman Green:    That sounds great.    I'm just, ninety-five
percent, ninety, ninety-five percent fall under that category. I
mean that's, our budget for the jail just keeps going up. It's
going up, you know, every month. If we can't collect monies, can
we make them do community service by cleaning up alleyways or
whatever?   I mean we have Adult Probation out here, right, that
does that on the weekends, I believe.

Mr. Serna:   Madam Mayor, Mr. Green, members of the Council, the
judge is correct that the, that Pre-Trial Services is one of those
remedies that we think is going to be able to address part of that
issue and minimize those costs. And that is significantly higher
than what was budgeted so it's a tabletop discussion on a daily
basis. And it is obviously very complicated and there are a great
number of approaches to try and analyze the data. And, and we met
with the jail, and we looked at their records and we've caught
mistakes and subsequently there's, at best, a lot of confusion
about a lot of those issues. To your point, I can say that some
of these issues were addressed twenty, twenty-five years ago so
it's kind of an age old question about what charges can be charged
to indigent folks who are presumed innocent until they are found
otherwise.   And so we can't, we can't necessarily collect. And
that's been part of the challenge. The other issue that you just
raised about trying to use them in some organized way that is
somewhat limited. But we tried that as well twenty, twenty-five
years ago. In fact, we discovered, as a lot of jurisdictions do,
that there's a lot of liability associated with it. And in our
case, we actually had an inmate who was smart enough to take the
risk. And he, in fact, received a $25,000 judgment from the City
of South Tucson.     And we were, you know, we thought we were
(inaudible) 'cause we were, we were getting them for like fifty
cents an hour to do a number of things, including picking up
garbage back before we had the trucks that we have now. We did it
manually. And so there are a multitude of issues, all of which
are legitimate, which we're trying to address. And I think one of
the more profound ones was to cut it off at the pass and have Pre-
Trial Services approach that the judge mentioned along with some
other strategies. There's no easy answer to what those remedies
are. It takes a lot of time and a lot of analysis of what we're
being charged.    We're discovering that often times we're being
charged for a thirty day stay for someone who was actually, we
have records, was released after the fourth day. And so that gets
bogged down with the County side because then they, you know, they
try to reconcile and it's, you know, we're spending a lot time
running back and forth trying to resolve this issue. So all of
Minutes of Regular Meeting
April 21, 2008
Page 7

the points that you raised are valid points. We're trying to stop
the hemorrhaging 'cause it is a very, very costly issue that's
going to impact, again, the budget that we'll be bringing forward
to you.

Councilman Diaz:   What's the dollar amount now?

Mr. Serna: I, even if I knew it, I'd probably be embarrassed to
mention it, but it's pretty significant.        You know, we're
averaging more than twice the budgeted amount. And the judge has
already has invoked a number of different strategies to include
zoning, which is something we didn't have when I was here which
prohibits repeat offenders, prostitutes and the like, from coming
back into certain areas of town and have, you know, get them
outside of our town. Some of them wind up coming back anyway, but
I think he's caught most of them and diffused that issue quite a
bit.   I don't know if there's a period at the end of this
discussion because there are a great number of issues here that
really make it more complicate. He's really taken a good charge.
Pat and Hector have really been attentive. Our staff is, Police
Chief is, you know, my hat is off to her 'cause she's really,
she's really done a good job of educating and creating some
sensitivity with the Police Department to pay attention to the
kinds of things that are out there. Obviously, the one that no
one has been able to get a hold of, it's really that whole
graffiti thing, which is a separate discussion.    But that's an
overwhelming issue that we're facing right now. Anyway, I could
go on and on, on any other specific questions that you all might
want to talk to us about? Please feel free to come to our office
and give you more time.

Mayor Eckstrom: I think that's important because we only have a
limited time here so if, you know, any of my colleagues do have
questions, you know, go to the City Manager.

Councilman Diaz: There is a word change that I suggest on page
one of six in regards to the agreement.         Down on the last
sentence, it says, "A prisoner arrested by the City of South
Tucson," shouldn't that be a person, a person arrested by the City
of South Tucson?

Mr. Serna: I don't see the reference, but I'm sure it's as you
described it. (Inaudible).

Councilman Diaz:   Thank you.

Motion passed unanimously with revision.

ITEM #08 - RESOLUTION NO. 08-17 OF THE MAYOR AND COUNCIL OF THE
Minutes of Regular Meeting
April 21, 2008
Page 8

CITY OF SOUTH TUCSON, ARIZONA, APPROVING THE SOUTH TUCSON HOUSING
AUTHORITY'S WRITE-OFF OF UNCOLLECTIBLE DEBTS AND AUTHORIZING THE
EXECUTION OF THIS RESOLUTION FOR THE PURPOSE OF AUTHORIZING THE
CITY OF SOUTH TUCSON HOUSING AUTHORITY DIRECTOR TO SUBMIT SAME TO
HUD AND ITS FEE ACCOUNTANT AND DECLARING AN EMERGENCY TO EXIST -
Mr. Serna asked that the item be tabled until next week. Motion
by Councilman Rojas to table the item.     Seconded by Councilman
Garcia. Motion passed unanimously.


ITEM #10 - HOUSING AUTHORITY SECURITY CONTRACT DISCUSSION AND
ACTION - Mr. Serna informed the Council HUD has recently notified
the South Tucson Housing Authority it would no longer authorize
funding for the security contract at the Housing Authority
complex.    The monthly/yearly contract cost ($20,000/$240,000,
respectively) must be terminated. HUD is willing to fund $1,500 a
month for security.    Mr. Serna stated the Housing Authority is
pursuing strategies with security companies to provide services.
There are no funds available in the general budget, but a line
item under Rental Fees Collected has been identified as an
allowable expense to be used as a source. It has been difficult
to locate a company to provide minimum security coverage, but one
company is willing to provide eight hours of coverage, seven days
a week, which amounts to $5,500 a month.        Mr. Serna stated
residents have not yet been notified of the security change as
staff wanted to alert the Council first.       Residents will be
notified staff is working to provide service, especially on
critical weekend nights. Motion by Councilman Diaz that the Mayor
and Council direct the City Manager to seek a compromise with the
Department of Housing and Urban Development for funding of
diminished security coverage at the Housing Authority. Seconded
by Councilman Rojas. Motion passed unanimously.


ITEM #11 - REPORTS - No reports at this time.


ITEM #12 - CALL TO THE AUDIENCE - No response from the audience.


ITEM #13 - ADJOURNMENT - Motion by Councilman Garcia that the
Regular Meeting be adjourned.   Seconded by Councilman Rojas.
Motion passed unanimously.



                               ___________________________
                               Jennifer Eckstrom, Mayor
Minutes of Regular Meeting
April 21, 2008
Page 9

ATTEST:



__________________________________
Marie Dolores Robles, City Clerk


CERTIFICATION
I hereby certify that the foregoing minutes are a true and correct
copy of the minutes of the Regular Meeting of the City Council of
South Tucson, Arizona, held on the 21st day of April, 2008.      I
further certify the meeting was duly called and a quorum was
present.

          Dated this         day of                 , 2008.



                              _________________________________
                              Marie Dolores Robles, City Clerk

				
DOCUMENT INFO
Categories:
Tags:
Stats:
views:4
posted:1/5/2012
language:
pages:9